https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457821 Contravention of the foreign exchange law was admitted, as the currency was not offered for sale within the prescribed period and was seized from the appellant's residence. Although an explanation based on family illness was advanced, the adjudicatory authority found the explanation insufficient to disturb the penalty and confiscation order. The penalty of Rs. 2,000 was treated as not excessive, and no sufficient ground was made out for interference. The order of penalty and confiscation was therefore upheld, with the principle stated that admitted contravention and a non-excessive penalty do not justify relief on sympathetic grounds. en-us Wed, 30 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Sep 2024 21:11:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457821 Contravention of the foreign exchange law was admitted, as the currency was not offered for sale within the prescribed period and was seized from the appellant's residence. Although an explanation based on family illness was advanced, the adjudicatory authority found the explanation insufficient to disturb the penalty and confiscation order. The penalty of Rs. 2,000 was treated as not excessive, and no sufficient ground was made out for interference. The order of penalty and confiscation was therefore upheld, with the principle stated that admitted contravention and a non-excessive penalty do not justify relief on sympathetic grounds. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 30 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457821