<?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>2026 (5) TMI 67 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790865</link>
    <description>Where the RBI-extended due date for repatriation of export proceeds expired after FEMA came into force, the default was treated as governed by FEMA and not barred by earlier FERA proceedings involving different GRs and a different period. The objection based on res judicata and repeal of FERA therefore failed. The Tribunal also held that a partner who personally participated in export realisation efforts and signed export documents, and a constituted attorney who signed letters and participated in the firm&#039;s affairs, were both involved in the conduct of the business and liable for the firm&#039;s contraventions under FEMA. The penalty was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 07:40:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899593" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 67 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790865</link>
      <description>Where the RBI-extended due date for repatriation of export proceeds expired after FEMA came into force, the default was treated as governed by FEMA and not barred by earlier FERA proceedings involving different GRs and a different period. The objection based on res judicata and repeal of FERA therefore failed. The Tribunal also held that a partner who personally participated in export realisation efforts and signed export documents, and a constituted attorney who signed letters and participated in the firm&#039;s affairs, were both involved in the conduct of the business and liable for the firm&#039;s contraventions under FEMA. The penalty was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790865</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>