<?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 (8) TMI 165 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796292</link>
    <description>For non-physical software imports, the importer must establish actual receipt of software corresponding to foreign-exchange remittances through reliable certification; an intimation to Customs, a pre-import valuation report, and a later expert opinion based on company-supplied CDs were insufficient. The material therefore supported the company&#039;s contravention, although penalties were substantially reduced for financial hardship. A CEO, director, shareholder and joint authorised signatory who authorised outward remittances was personally liable where his statement indicated the software lacked value and he failed to prove due diligence to prevent the contravention.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2026 08:39:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=915191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 165 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796292</link>
      <description>For non-physical software imports, the importer must establish actual receipt of software corresponding to foreign-exchange remittances through reliable certification; an intimation to Customs, a pre-import valuation report, and a later expert opinion based on company-supplied CDs were insufficient. The material therefore supported the company&#039;s contravention, although penalties were substantially reduced for financial hardship. A CEO, director, shareholder and joint authorised signatory who authorised outward remittances was personally liable where his statement indicated the software lacked value and he failed to prove due diligence to prevent the contravention.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796292</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>