<?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>1992 (7) TMI 357 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457969</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found the appellant guilty of contravening section 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act by acquiring foreign exchange without surrendering it within the stipulated time and purchasing foreign exchange without RBI permission. While the charge under section 8(2) was dismissed, the Tribunal upheld penalties for section 8(1) violations. The appellant&#039;s plea for leniency was considered, resulting in a reduced penalty due to the dismissal of the section 8(2) charge. The Tribunal deemed the penalties proportionate, noting that the Adjudicating Officer had already exercised leniency, and dismissed further leniency requests.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2024 18:17:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=771377" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (7) TMI 357 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457969</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found the appellant guilty of contravening section 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act by acquiring foreign exchange without surrendering it within the stipulated time and purchasing foreign exchange without RBI permission. While the charge under section 8(2) was dismissed, the Tribunal upheld penalties for section 8(1) violations. The appellant&#039;s plea for leniency was considered, resulting in a reduced penalty due to the dismissal of the section 8(2) charge. The Tribunal deemed the penalties proportionate, noting that the Adjudicating Officer had already exercised leniency, and dismissed further leniency requests.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457969</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>