https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457964 Liability for unauthorised acquisition of foreign exchange arises only where the department proves that the person actually purchased, received, borrowed, or otherwise controlled foreign exchange, or was party to a conversion of Indian currency into foreign exchange. On the record, the goods were imported from Hungary against rupee licences, but there was no reliable evidence that the appellants received foreign exchange, authorised any remittance abroad on their behalf, or controlled the alleged foreign remittance. Suspicion drawn from the switch-deal structure and the origin of the goods could not replace proof of the essential ingredients of contravention, so the alleged breach of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was not established. en-us Mon, 27 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Oct 2024 18:17:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457964 Liability for unauthorised acquisition of foreign exchange arises only where the department proves that the person actually purchased, received, borrowed, or otherwise controlled foreign exchange, or was party to a conversion of Indian currency into foreign exchange. On the record, the goods were imported from Hungary against rupee licences, but there was no reliable evidence that the appellants received foreign exchange, authorised any remittance abroad on their behalf, or controlled the alleged foreign remittance. Suspicion drawn from the switch-deal structure and the origin of the goods could not replace proof of the essential ingredients of contravention, so the alleged breach of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was not established. Case-Laws FEMA Mon, 27 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457964