<?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>Import on credit under FEMA: delayed remittance beyond six months established contravention, but penalties were reduced as technical.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98507</link>
    <description>Import of goods on credit was treated as a borrowing in foreign exchange because the resident importer&#039;s liability to the overseas supplier remained outstanding until remittance. The Tribunal held that Regulation 5(3) of the FEMA borrowing and lending regulations was directly attracted, and that delayed payment beyond six months without RBI approval established contravention; Regulation 3 was held technically inapplicable. The reliance on prior authority was rejected as factually distinguishable. Although contravention was upheld, the breach was treated as technical because it related to a single consignment and the full amount had already been remitted, so the penalties on the company and its directors were reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 07:48:40 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 07:48:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=895335" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Import on credit under FEMA: delayed remittance beyond six months established contravention, but penalties were reduced as technical.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98507</link>
      <description>Import of goods on credit was treated as a borrowing in foreign exchange because the resident importer&#039;s liability to the overseas supplier remained outstanding until remittance. The Tribunal held that Regulation 5(3) of the FEMA borrowing and lending regulations was directly attracted, and that delayed payment beyond six months without RBI approval established contravention; Regulation 3 was held technically inapplicable. The reliance on prior authority was rejected as factually distinguishable. Although contravention was upheld, the breach was treated as technical because it related to a single consignment and the full amount had already been remitted, so the penalties on the company and its directors were reduced.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 07:48:40 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98507</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>