https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791603 An importer who, after notice, failed to furnish or preserve documentary proof of import was held liable to adverse inference and penalty under the FEMA framework and RBI directions, because the duty to produce evidence of import rested on the importer and not merely on the authorised dealer. Liability under Section 42 was also upheld against the person responsible for the company's business during the contravention period, as the managing director produced no proof of due diligence. The Tribunal sustained the findings of contravention and responsible-person liability, but reduced the penalty on proportionality grounds. en-us Thu, 07 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 May 2026 09:01:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791603 An importer who, after notice, failed to furnish or preserve documentary proof of import was held liable to adverse inference and penalty under the FEMA framework and RBI directions, because the duty to produce evidence of import rested on the importer and not merely on the authorised dealer. Liability under Section 42 was also upheld against the person responsible for the company's business during the contravention period, as the managing director produced no proof of due diligence. The Tribunal sustained the findings of contravention and responsible-person liability, but reduced the penalty on proportionality grounds. Case-Laws FEMA Thu, 07 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791603