<?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>2007 (12) TMI 557 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457549</link>
    <description>A retracted statement may still be relied upon in foreign exchange penalty proceedings if it is found voluntary and true, and unsupported allegations of coercion do not displace its evidentiary value. The Tribunal also applied the principle that the burden lies on the appellant to prove lawful possession, import, declaration, and deposit of foreign currency, particularly where unexplained credits appear in multiple NRE accounts. On the facts, the appellant failed to rebut the incriminating circumstances or produce satisfactory proof of lawful acquisition, so the adjudication and penalty were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2024 14:56:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=769939" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (12) TMI 557 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457549</link>
      <description>A retracted statement may still be relied upon in foreign exchange penalty proceedings if it is found voluntary and true, and unsupported allegations of coercion do not displace its evidentiary value. The Tribunal also applied the principle that the burden lies on the appellant to prove lawful possession, import, declaration, and deposit of foreign currency, particularly where unexplained credits appear in multiple NRE accounts. On the facts, the appellant failed to rebut the incriminating circumstances or produce satisfactory proof of lawful acquisition, so the adjudication and penalty were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457549</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>