https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457849 Proof of contravention under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act required reliable evidence of all statutory ingredients, including identification of the non-resident principal and a clear nexus between the appellant and the alleged payments or receipt of funds. A retracted custodial statement, without adequate corroboration, was treated as insufficient to establish either payment on behalf of a person resident outside India or receipt otherwise than through an authorised dealer. Because the substantive foreign exchange contraventions were not proved, the connected confiscation of seized Indian currency also lacked a valid basis and could not be sustained. en-us Mon, 06 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 29 Sep 2024 16:20:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457849 Proof of contravention under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act required reliable evidence of all statutory ingredients, including identification of the non-resident principal and a clear nexus between the appellant and the alleged payments or receipt of funds. A retracted custodial statement, without adequate corroboration, was treated as insufficient to establish either payment on behalf of a person resident outside India or receipt otherwise than through an authorised dealer. Because the substantive foreign exchange contraventions were not proved, the connected confiscation of seized Indian currency also lacked a valid basis and could not be sustained. Case-Laws FEMA Mon, 06 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457849