https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779275 AT upheld findings that the appellant violated Section 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) of the 1973 Act, concluding the confessional statement recorded after summons was made voluntarily and could be relied on under SC precedent; co-noticees' statements and documentary material corroborated involvement in hawala transactions. The AT reduced the penalty from Rs. 20 lakh to Rs. 5 lakh (considering age and pre-deposit) but affirmed confiscation of Rs. 21.80 lakh. With this substitution of penalty, the appeal was disposed of. en-us Tue, 19 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Oct 2025 08:30:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779275 AT upheld findings that the appellant violated Section 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) of the 1973 Act, concluding the confessional statement recorded after summons was made voluntarily and could be relied on under SC precedent; co-noticees' statements and documentary material corroborated involvement in hawala transactions. The AT reduced the penalty from Rs. 20 lakh to Rs. 5 lakh (considering age and pre-deposit) but affirmed confiscation of Rs. 21.80 lakh. With this substitution of penalty, the appeal was disposed of. Case-Laws FEMA Tue, 19 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779275