<?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 (7) TMI 1370 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795484</link>
    <description>Confiscation of securities for a FEMA contravention under Section 13(2) is discretionary, not mandatory. The provision uses &quot;may&quot; and &quot;if he thinks fit&quot;, allowing the Adjudicating Authority to order confiscation in addition to penalties only after exercising judicial discretion. The notes state that penalties were imposed for unauthorised share transfers and that the authority had considered the material; no non-application of mind, improper exercise of discretion, or miscarriage of justice was established. Accordingly, declining confiscation while imposing penalties was treated as justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:42:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=913137" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 1370 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795484</link>
      <description>Confiscation of securities for a FEMA contravention under Section 13(2) is discretionary, not mandatory. The provision uses &quot;may&quot; and &quot;if he thinks fit&quot;, allowing the Adjudicating Authority to order confiscation in addition to penalties only after exercising judicial discretion. The notes state that penalties were imposed for unauthorised share transfers and that the authority had considered the material; no non-application of mind, improper exercise of discretion, or miscarriage of justice was established. Accordingly, declining confiscation while imposing penalties was treated as justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795484</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>