<?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>2004 (4) TMI 667 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457689</link>
    <description>In quasi-criminal foreign exchange adjudication, contravention was upheld where mutually corroborative statements, seized documents and admissions supported findings of under-invoiced export proceeds and unauthorised commission payments. The challenge that Customs clearance and denial of under-invoicing displaced the allegations was rejected because the evidence remained reliable and consistent. On penalty, the tribunal examined proportionality against the circumstances and reduced the penalty on one appellant to fifty per cent, while confirming the penalty on the other. The violations were therefore maintained, with only limited interference on quantum.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:44:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=770490" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 667 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457689</link>
      <description>In quasi-criminal foreign exchange adjudication, contravention was upheld where mutually corroborative statements, seized documents and admissions supported findings of under-invoiced export proceeds and unauthorised commission payments. The challenge that Customs clearance and denial of under-invoicing displaced the allegations was rejected because the evidence remained reliable and consistent. On penalty, the tribunal examined proportionality against the circumstances and reduced the penalty on one appellant to fifty per cent, while confirming the penalty on the other. The violations were therefore maintained, with only limited interference on quantum.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457689</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>