https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789630 Contravention of Regulation 5(1)(iv) of the Foreign Exchange Management (Deposit) Regulations, 2000 sustained penalty against NRNR account holders because the regulatory obligation applied to the account holders as well as the authorised dealer, and later omission of the provision did not extinguish liability for prior breaches. The penalty was therefore upheld under FEMA. Confiscation of the amounts in the accounts, however, was set aside because the authority exercised a discretionary power without recorded reasons showing why penalty alone was inadequate; the non-speaking confiscatory order could not stand, and remand was declined after the lapse of time. en-us Wed, 08 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Apr 2026 08:53:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789630 Contravention of Regulation 5(1)(iv) of the Foreign Exchange Management (Deposit) Regulations, 2000 sustained penalty against NRNR account holders because the regulatory obligation applied to the account holders as well as the authorised dealer, and later omission of the provision did not extinguish liability for prior breaches. The penalty was therefore upheld under FEMA. Confiscation of the amounts in the accounts, however, was set aside because the authority exercised a discretionary power without recorded reasons showing why penalty alone was inadequate; the non-speaking confiscatory order could not stand, and remand was declined after the lapse of time. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 08 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789630