https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457999 Non-realisation of export proceeds within the prescribed period triggered the statutory presumption under section 18(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 that the exporter had not taken all reasonable steps to secure payment. The exporter had to rebut that presumption by showing timely and effective recovery measures, including approaching the Reserve Bank of India for extension of time or permission to write off the unrealised proceeds where required. On the facts, no reliable evidence showed those steps were taken, and the claim that the default was beyond the exporter's control failed to displace the presumption. The penalty for contravention of section 18(2) was therefore upheld. en-us Mon, 30 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Oct 2024 10:56:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457999 Non-realisation of export proceeds within the prescribed period triggered the statutory presumption under section 18(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 that the exporter had not taken all reasonable steps to secure payment. The exporter had to rebut that presumption by showing timely and effective recovery measures, including approaching the Reserve Bank of India for extension of time or permission to write off the unrealised proceeds where required. On the facts, no reliable evidence showed those steps were taken, and the claim that the default was beyond the exporter's control failed to displace the presumption. The penalty for contravention of section 18(2) was therefore upheld. Case-Laws FEMA Mon, 30 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457999