https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457805 The appeal was allowed, and the order imposing a penalty under section 9(1)(a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, was set aside. The Chairperson dispensed with the pre-deposit requirement due to potential undue hardship. The inconsistencies and contradictions in the statements and lack of proper investigation led to granting the appellant the benefit of the doubt. The Chairperson criticized the investigation's inadequacy, suggesting further inquiries into the transactions were necessary. en-us Wed, 20 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Sep 2024 16:00:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457805 The appeal was allowed, and the order imposing a penalty under section 9(1)(a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, was set aside. The Chairperson dispensed with the pre-deposit requirement due to potential undue hardship. The inconsistencies and contradictions in the statements and lack of proper investigation led to granting the appellant the benefit of the doubt. The Chairperson criticized the investigation's inadequacy, suggesting further inquiries into the transactions were necessary. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 20 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457805