https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779051 AT held that the Department failed to prove any contravention of Section 3(a) of FEMA 1999 for remittance of foreign exchange; evidence of actual remittance was absent and allegations rested on presumption without corroborating bank statements or other proof. Disputed letters and signature assertions were not determinative, and the tribunal declined to resolve that controversy because the essential element of remittance was missing. The impugned order is set aside, appeals by the three appellants are allowed, and the Department's appeal for enhancement of penalty is dismissed. en-us Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Sep 2025 08:34:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779051 AT held that the Department failed to prove any contravention of Section 3(a) of FEMA 1999 for remittance of foreign exchange; evidence of actual remittance was absent and allegations rested on presumption without corroborating bank statements or other proof. Disputed letters and signature assertions were not determinative, and the tribunal declined to resolve that controversy because the essential element of remittance was missing. The impugned order is set aside, appeals by the three appellants are allowed, and the Department's appeal for enhancement of penalty is dismissed. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779051