https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457874 A contravention of section 9(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 is made out only where the evidence proves remittance from a foreign country into India otherwise than through an authorised dealer. Here, the show-cause allegations described a domestic payment with a corresponding foreign exchange payment abroad, which did not satisfy that statutory requirement. The receipts relied on did not show that the funds were received for Wimpy India (P.) Ltd. or that the money was paid on the appellant's instructions, and the section 40 statements contained no admission of such remittance. The finding of contravention was therefore unsustainable. en-us Mon, 09 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Sep 2024 12:33:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457874 A contravention of section 9(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 is made out only where the evidence proves remittance from a foreign country into India otherwise than through an authorised dealer. Here, the show-cause allegations described a domestic payment with a corresponding foreign exchange payment abroad, which did not satisfy that statutory requirement. The receipts relied on did not show that the funds were received for Wimpy India (P.) Ltd. or that the money was paid on the appellant's instructions, and the section 40 statements contained no admission of such remittance. The finding of contravention was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws FEMA Mon, 09 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457874