<?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>2003 (5) TMI 539 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457723</link>
    <description>A retracted inculpatory statement may still be relied on where the retraction is vague or unconvincing and corroborative circumstances support the original account. The tribunal found the explanation for the currency and related transactions unsatisfactory, and sustained the finding of liability. Confiscation was reduced, penalty was maintained, and the balance amount was directed to be refunded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Sep 2024 16:42:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=770676" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (5) TMI 539 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457723</link>
      <description>A retracted inculpatory statement may still be relied on where the retraction is vague or unconvincing and corroborative circumstances support the original account. The tribunal found the explanation for the currency and related transactions unsatisfactory, and sustained the finding of liability. Confiscation was reduced, penalty was maintained, and the balance amount was directed to be refunded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457723</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>