<?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>2025 (8) TMI 14 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775827</link>
    <description>The AT under SAFEMA dismissed the appeal against the penalty imposed for contravention of FEMA provisions related to unauthorized foreign exchange remittance for satellite transponder hire. The appellant, a Deputy General Manager at the relevant bank branch, failed to provide evidence negating his posting there during the period of alleged contravention (July to December 2012). The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s counsel evasive and held that the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- was justified and maintained. The penalty, already deposited, was adjusted accordingly. The appellant was allowed to file a review petition with proof of posting within the limitation period if factual.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2025 08:15:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=840101" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 14 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775827</link>
      <description>The AT under SAFEMA dismissed the appeal against the penalty imposed for contravention of FEMA provisions related to unauthorized foreign exchange remittance for satellite transponder hire. The appellant, a Deputy General Manager at the relevant bank branch, failed to provide evidence negating his posting there during the period of alleged contravention (July to December 2012). The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s counsel evasive and held that the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- was justified and maintained. The penalty, already deposited, was adjusted accordingly. The appellant was allowed to file a review petition with proof of posting within the limitation period if factual.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>