https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457857 Penalty for alleged contravention under FERA section 9(1)(b) could not rest solely on the appellant's statement recorded under section 40, because no independent evidence proved receipt of the alleged amount from a person resident outside India. The statement was also retracted, and the Board applied the settled principle that a person cannot be held guilty on a bare confessional statement, particularly a retracted one, unless corroborated by other material. As the investigation itself was not supported by any verified source or corroborative record, the penalty was not sustained and the appeal was allowed. en-us Mon, 23 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 29 Sep 2024 16:20:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457857 Penalty for alleged contravention under FERA section 9(1)(b) could not rest solely on the appellant's statement recorded under section 40, because no independent evidence proved receipt of the alleged amount from a person resident outside India. The statement was also retracted, and the Board applied the settled principle that a person cannot be held guilty on a bare confessional statement, particularly a retracted one, unless corroborated by other material. As the investigation itself was not supported by any verified source or corroborative record, the penalty was not sustained and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws FEMA Mon, 23 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457857