<?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>2009 (1) TMI 948 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457419</link>
    <description>Revisional proceedings under the repealed Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 remained maintainable before the substituted forum because the repeal by the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 did not extinguish pending liabilities or remedies, and the saving provisions preserved continuation of such matters. The Tribunal therefore held it had jurisdiction to hear the revision. On liability, it found the receipt of funds through gift cheques was not satisfactorily explained, and circumstantial evidence together with adverse inference from facts within the respondents&#039; special knowledge established contravention of the foreign exchange law. The adjudication order was set aside and penalties were imposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 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=769190" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 948 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457419</link>
      <description>Revisional proceedings under the repealed Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 remained maintainable before the substituted forum because the repeal by the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 did not extinguish pending liabilities or remedies, and the saving provisions preserved continuation of such matters. The Tribunal therefore held it had jurisdiction to hear the revision. On liability, it found the receipt of funds through gift cheques was not satisfactorily explained, and circumstantial evidence together with adverse inference from facts within the respondents&#039; special knowledge established contravention of the foreign exchange law. The adjudication order was set aside and penalties were imposed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457419</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>