<?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>1999 (11) TMI 907 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457822</link>
    <description>Statements recorded during search were treated as unreliable because the appellant remained under enforcement control through the night, making voluntariness doubtful; they could not, by themselves, sustain the charges and required independent corroboration. The alleged recovery of foreign exchange and documents from the appellant&#039;s exclusive possession was also not proved, as the search procedure was defective, the panch witnesses did not properly witness the search, and the evidence supported a possible alternative possession by a third person. With the statements excluded and recovery unproved, the show-cause allegations of foreign exchange contravention, including transactions with non-residents and acknowledgment of debt, were not substantiated, and the penalties could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2024 21:11:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=770921" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (11) TMI 907 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457822</link>
      <description>Statements recorded during search were treated as unreliable because the appellant remained under enforcement control through the night, making voluntariness doubtful; they could not, by themselves, sustain the charges and required independent corroboration. The alleged recovery of foreign exchange and documents from the appellant&#039;s exclusive possession was also not proved, as the search procedure was defective, the panch witnesses did not properly witness the search, and the evidence supported a possible alternative possession by a third person. With the statements excluded and recovery unproved, the show-cause allegations of foreign exchange contravention, including transactions with non-residents and acknowledgment of debt, were not substantiated, and the penalties could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457822</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>