<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (12) TMI 838 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457426</link>
    <description>A voluntary confessional statement recorded under section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was treated as admissible and capable of supporting adverse findings where no material showed coercion, inducement, threat, or pressure. The Tribunal also held that documents and fax correspondence were not rendered inadmissible merely because of irregular recovery or lack of signature, since relevant evidence remained usable when read with the statement and corroborated the alleged contravention. On that basis, the evidence was found sufficient, the penalty order was upheld, and the appeal failed on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2024 12:51:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=769183" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (12) TMI 838 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457426</link>
      <description>A voluntary confessional statement recorded under section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was treated as admissible and capable of supporting adverse findings where no material showed coercion, inducement, threat, or pressure. The Tribunal also held that documents and fax correspondence were not rendered inadmissible merely because of irregular recovery or lack of signature, since relevant evidence remained usable when read with the statement and corroborated the alleged contravention. On that basis, the evidence was found sufficient, the penalty order was upheld, and the appeal failed on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457426</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>