<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1996 (2) TMI 603 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457883</link>
    <description>Failure to realise outstanding export proceeds attracts the statutory presumption of contravention under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act unless the exporter shows effective legal or other measures to recover the balance; business inconvenience alone does not displace that obligation. In assessing penalty, mitigating factors such as long business history, earlier foreign exchange earnings, no design to retain funds abroad, business stoppage, and financial hardship may justify reduction where the original amount is harsh. A separate penalty on a partner is ordinarily unsustainable when the firm has already been penalised and no personal gain or distinct misconduct is shown.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:51:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=771191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (2) TMI 603 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457883</link>
      <description>Failure to realise outstanding export proceeds attracts the statutory presumption of contravention under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act unless the exporter shows effective legal or other measures to recover the balance; business inconvenience alone does not displace that obligation. In assessing penalty, mitigating factors such as long business history, earlier foreign exchange earnings, no design to retain funds abroad, business stoppage, and financial hardship may justify reduction where the original amount is harsh. A separate penalty on a partner is ordinarily unsustainable when the firm has already been penalised and no personal gain or distinct misconduct is shown.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457883</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>