https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783932 The dominant issue was whether the appellate forum should enhance the penalty for export proceeds undervaluation on the ground that the Adjudicating Authority imposed an amount not commensurate with the contravention. Interpreting s. 13(1) FEMA, the Tribunal held that the statute prescribes only a maximum penalty of up to three times the amount of contravention and does not mandate any fixed or minimum penalty; the quantum is a discretionary determination to be exercised judiciously on the facts and evidence. As the Adjudicating Authority had recorded detailed, reasoned findings, evaluated the evidence, and examined each contravention objectively, the penalty order was not shown to be indiscreet or arbitrary; the appeal seeking enhancement was dismissed. en-us Thu, 18 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 07:18:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783932 The dominant issue was whether the appellate forum should enhance the penalty for export proceeds undervaluation on the ground that the Adjudicating Authority imposed an amount not commensurate with the contravention. Interpreting s. 13(1) FEMA, the Tribunal held that the statute prescribes only a maximum penalty of up to three times the amount of contravention and does not mandate any fixed or minimum penalty; the quantum is a discretionary determination to be exercised judiciously on the facts and evidence. As the Adjudicating Authority had recorded detailed, reasoned findings, evaluated the evidence, and examined each contravention objectively, the penalty order was not shown to be indiscreet or arbitrary; the appeal seeking enhancement was dismissed. Case-Laws FEMA Thu, 18 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783932