<?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>1974 (12) TMI 85 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457956</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal overturned the Director of Enforcement&#039;s decision, which had imposed a Rs. 5,000 penalty on the appellants for failing to repatriate funds from Rentonica Ltd., Manchester, under section 12(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947. The Tribunal determined that the appellants had taken reasonable steps to recover the funds, including correspondence with the Indian High Commissioner in London. It concluded that the appellants&#039; choice not to litigate against the now-liquidated purchaser was an error in judgment, not a penal offense. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the penalty was set aside, and any paid amount was ordered to be refunded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 21 Dec 1974 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=771390" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (12) TMI 85 - FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION APPELLATE BOARD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457956</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal overturned the Director of Enforcement&#039;s decision, which had imposed a Rs. 5,000 penalty on the appellants for failing to repatriate funds from Rentonica Ltd., Manchester, under section 12(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947. The Tribunal determined that the appellants had taken reasonable steps to recover the funds, including correspondence with the Indian High Commissioner in London. It concluded that the appellants&#039; choice not to litigate against the now-liquidated purchaser was an error in judgment, not a penal offense. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the penalty was set aside, and any paid amount was ordered to be refunded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 21 Dec 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457956</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>