https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457884 Contraventions under sections 9(1)(a), 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 were established on the admitted facts, but the Board found the conduct was not prejudicial to the objects and purposes of the Act. In those circumstances, the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority was treated as excessive and was moderated. The findings of contravention were upheld, while the penalties were reduced to Rs. 5,000 in one appeal and Rs. 10,000 in the other, with consequential reduction of the amount payable by the second appellant. en-us Wed, 12 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:51:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457884 Contraventions under sections 9(1)(a), 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 were established on the admitted facts, but the Board found the conduct was not prejudicial to the objects and purposes of the Act. In those circumstances, the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority was treated as excessive and was moderated. The findings of contravention were upheld, while the penalties were reduced to Rs. 5,000 in one appeal and Rs. 10,000 in the other, with consequential reduction of the amount payable by the second appellant. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 12 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457884