<?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 843 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457420</link>
    <description>Reserve Bank approval conditions required an overseas subsidiary to bear the travel and living expenses of representatives undertaking work for that subsidiary. Payment of those expenses from the appellants&#039; funds was treated as a substantive breach of the approval condition and a contravention of the foreign exchange regime. Remittances made before the subsidiary&#039;s incorporation were regarded as integrally connected with its establishment, rather than solely with a liaison office. Transfers for the benefit of the proposed subsidiary without necessary permission breached the applicable approval conditions and constituted unauthorised foreign-exchange transfers. Penalties for both contraventions were upheld, and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 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=769189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (12) TMI 843 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457420</link>
      <description>Reserve Bank approval conditions required an overseas subsidiary to bear the travel and living expenses of representatives undertaking work for that subsidiary. Payment of those expenses from the appellants&#039; funds was treated as a substantive breach of the approval condition and a contravention of the foreign exchange regime. Remittances made before the subsidiary&#039;s incorporation were regarded as integrally connected with its establishment, rather than solely with a liaison office. Transfers for the benefit of the proposed subsidiary without necessary permission breached the applicable approval conditions and constituted unauthorised foreign-exchange transfers. Penalties for both contraventions were upheld, and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457420</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>