<?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 (4) TMI 539 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457922</link>
    <description>Transactions disclosed to the Reserve Bank and accepted as closed could not be treated as unauthorised foreign exchange contraventions. The alleged transfer of Syrian Pounds 6,249.41 between projects was not established as a breach under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, because it had been disclosed and supported by accounts. The payment of US $2,107 as agency commission was also not treated as an excess or unauthorised payment, since commission up to 5% had been permitted and the payment pattern was explained to, and accepted by, the Reserve Bank. The alleged short payment of Syrian Pounds 18,438.58 and the directors&#039; derivative penalty failed because the notice did not specifically charge that head and the principal contravention was not proved; the penalty order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2024 20:24:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=771260" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (4) TMI 539 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457922</link>
      <description>Transactions disclosed to the Reserve Bank and accepted as closed could not be treated as unauthorised foreign exchange contraventions. The alleged transfer of Syrian Pounds 6,249.41 between projects was not established as a breach under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, because it had been disclosed and supported by accounts. The payment of US $2,107 as agency commission was also not treated as an excess or unauthorised payment, since commission up to 5% had been permitted and the payment pattern was explained to, and accepted by, the Reserve Bank. The alleged short payment of Syrian Pounds 18,438.58 and the directors&#039; derivative penalty failed because the notice did not specifically charge that head and the principal contravention was not proved; the penalty order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457922</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>