<?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 (10) TMI 644 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457680</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal quashed the impugned adjudication order imposing a penalty for contravention of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, finding insufficient evidence to support allegations of clandestine payments and debt acknowledgment. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of substantial evidence and directed the return of the pre-deposit amount to the appellant, resolving the matter favorably for the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 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=770499" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (10) TMI 644 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457680</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal quashed the impugned adjudication order imposing a penalty for contravention of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, finding insufficient evidence to support allegations of clandestine payments and debt acknowledgment. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of substantial evidence and directed the return of the pre-deposit amount to the appellant, resolving the matter favorably for the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457680</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>