https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457918 The judgment set aside the Adjudication Order against the appellants, finding no contravention of sections 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The Chairman waived the pre-deposit requirement due to undue hardship, noted discrepancies in the SCNs, and emphasized the lack of evidence for alleged payments. The court ordered the refund of deposited penalty amounts, concluding that the payments were legally received and covered by general permission, thus not constituting a contravention. The decision clarified the legal interpretation of the Act, resulting in a favorable outcome for the appellants. en-us Thu, 21 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Sep 2024 20:24:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457918 The judgment set aside the Adjudication Order against the appellants, finding no contravention of sections 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The Chairman waived the pre-deposit requirement due to undue hardship, noted discrepancies in the SCNs, and emphasized the lack of evidence for alleged payments. The court ordered the refund of deposited penalty amounts, concluding that the payments were legally received and covered by general permission, thus not constituting a contravention. The decision clarified the legal interpretation of the Act, resulting in a favorable outcome for the appellants. Case-Laws FEMA Thu, 21 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457918