https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457843 Filing a civil suit against the foreign buyers and bank was treated as the only effective reasonable step available to secure export proceeds, so the presumption of contravention under section 18(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 stood rebutted and no breach under section 18(2) was made out. The adjudication was also held premature because RBI had already granted extension of time for realisation, and the authority could not assume the absence of any further extension while the recovery proceedings were pending. Penalties on the partner-appellants fell with the principal finding, as they were purely consequential and lacked an independent basis once the main contravention failed. en-us Thu, 04 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 29 Sep 2024 16:20:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457843 Filing a civil suit against the foreign buyers and bank was treated as the only effective reasonable step available to secure export proceeds, so the presumption of contravention under section 18(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 stood rebutted and no breach under section 18(2) was made out. The adjudication was also held premature because RBI had already granted extension of time for realisation, and the authority could not assume the absence of any further extension while the recovery proceedings were pending. Penalties on the partner-appellants fell with the principal finding, as they were purely consequential and lacked an independent basis once the main contravention failed. Case-Laws FEMA Thu, 04 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457843