<?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 (8) TMI 1031 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457448</link>
    <description>Knowledge of a creditor&#039;s non-resident status may be inferred from direct and circumstantial evidence, including surrounding documents, residence abroad, association between the parties, and the noticee&#039;s non-cooperation. On those facts, payment to, credit in favour of, and acknowledgment of a debt owed to a person resident outside India constituted contraventions of section 9(1)(a), 9(1)(c) and 9(1)(e) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The penalty was sustained for the principal appellants as commensurate with the offence, but was reduced to half for the third appellant because his role was only that of an agent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2024 20:17:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=769276" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 1031 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457448</link>
      <description>Knowledge of a creditor&#039;s non-resident status may be inferred from direct and circumstantial evidence, including surrounding documents, residence abroad, association between the parties, and the noticee&#039;s non-cooperation. On those facts, payment to, credit in favour of, and acknowledgment of a debt owed to a person resident outside India constituted contraventions of section 9(1)(a), 9(1)(c) and 9(1)(e) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The penalty was sustained for the principal appellants as commensurate with the offence, but was reduced to half for the third appellant because his role was only that of an agent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457448</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>