Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases FEMA Tri FEMA - Tri
Law
Court
Citation -
Landmark
Order by
 

 

FEMA - Tribunal - Case Laws

Showing 61 to 80 of 98 Records

  • 1999 (6) TMI 459 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Harshad P. Mehta Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... s. 9,50,000 in the hands of Ashish P. Patel. No other contentions were raised before us. For all the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the competent authority. We confirm the same and dismiss all the appeals.


  • 1999 (5) TMI 579 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Kasam Hussain Thaim Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... roperty (Procedure) Rules, 1989, we direct the appellant not to alienate, dispose of, part with possession or create any third party rights over the forfeited property, till the disposal of the proceedings before the Competent Authority after remand.


  • 1999 (5) TMI 578 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Ugam Bai (T.) (Smt.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... provisions of the SAFEMA apply and there was no jurisdiction in the Competent Authority to proceed to forfeit the properties. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the order of the Competent Authority, Madras, dated September 29, 1995, is set aside.


  • 1999 (4) TMI 580 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Ansar Rahman Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... the competent authority was justified in holding that these properties are illegally acquired properties. We see no reason to differ with the findings of the competent authority and we confirm the same. The appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.


  • 1999 (4) TMI 579 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Khozem F. Kaukawala Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... aforesaid reasons, we hold that the sale in favour of the appellant as well as his predecessors in title, were all null and void and hence the appeal has no legs to stand and is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the stay petition stands rejected.


  • 1999 (2) TMI 624 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    KK. Kuncheria Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... ty dated October 31, 1995, so far as item No. 1, which is, 1 acre 36 cents of land with building in Survey No. 81/1-I in Thrikodithanam village, Chenganacheri, is concerned. The appeal is allowed to the said extent and is dismissed in other respects.


  • 1999 (2) TMI 623 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Mrs. Hasina Ibrahim Parkar Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... roper service within the meaning of section 22 of the SAFEMA and the period of limitation started running from that date. For all the aforesaid reasons, we find no grounds for reviewing our order dated October 26, 1998, and the petition is dismissed.


  • 1999 (2) TMI 622 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Aminabi Kaskar Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... ing a certified copy of the order so far and will do so now. However, we are not attaching much importance to this aspect. In the view we have taken that the appeal is barred by limitation, the same cannot be entertained and is accordingly dismissed.


  • 1998 (10) TMI 511 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Hasina Ibrahim Parkar (Mrs.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... etent authority is directed not to implement the order dated October 14, 1998, until November 16, 1998, i.e., till the expiry of 30 days from the date of service of the order on October 17, 1998. With the above direction, the petition is disposed of.


  • 1998 (6) TMI 539 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Ahmed Yasin (S.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... tified and is confirmed. The appellant is at liberty to approach the competent authority for the option of payment of fine in lieu of forfeiture in respect of house properties under forfeiture. The appeal is accordingly partly allowed to this extent.


  • 1998 (4) TMI 502 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Sanjeev M. Deshmukh Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... Bombay dated July 18, 1995, has no bearing on the facts of the present case. The learned judges upheld the transaction in favour of the petitioner. For all the aforesaid reasons, we dismiss the appeal and confirm the order of the competent authority.


  • 1998 (2) TMI 540 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Smt. Neeta Nitin Bhanushali Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... e result of this appeal, we do not propose to pass any order which is different from that of the High Court. The same will be subject to the final result of the inquiry before the Competent Authority. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.


  • 1998 (1) TMI 491 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Dhanika Jaggi (Mrs.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... is also covered by the provisions of the SAFEMA. We, therefore, overrule the contention of the appellant with regard to the maintainability and application of the provisions of the SAFEMA to the appellant. The appeal will be considered on its merits.


  • 1998 (1) TMI 490 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Virendra Kumar Rai Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... 1953 and 1955 when the detenu, Shri Virendra Kumar Rai, was only 5 mdash 7 years of age and not liable for forfeiture and (d) that properties listed at S. Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 12 have been correctly forfeited. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.


  • 1998 (1) TMI 489 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Ghorpade (BB.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... not even a provision in the Act enabling the Appellate Tribunal to take suo motu action, even if the order of the competent authority is found to be incorrect. With these observations, we are constrained to dismiss these appeals as not maintainable.


  • 1997 (6) TMI 338 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Mrs. Allimmal Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... ther strange. Accordingly, we modify this part of the impugned order and order defreezing of the forfeiture of Rs. 21,000. In the result, except to the extent stated in paras. 11 and 13 (pages 45 and 46 supra) above, the appeal is otherwise rejected.


  • 1997 (6) TMI 337 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Sahul Hameed Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... pose to go into the merits. We accordingly allow F. P. A. Nos. 14/Mds of 1996 and 15/Mds of 1996 and set aside the orders of forfeiture of the Competent Authority. F. P. A. Nos. 16/Mds of 1996 and 17/Mds of 1996 will be dealt with by separate orders.


  • 1997 (4) TMI 464 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Smt. Pallavi Haribhai Tandel Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... therefore go into the merits of the case, as admittedly, the appeal was filed long after the expiry of 60 days after receipt of the order under appeal. The application, therefore, fails and is dismissed and, consequently, the appeal stands rejected.


  • 1996 (4) TMI 448 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Chandulal Kalidas Mehta Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... rson, Chandalal Kalidas Mehta. For all these reasons, we are unable to uphold this type of order. Accordingly, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order dated April 30, 1979, passed under section 7(9) by the Competent Authority, Ahmedabad.


  • 1995 (12) TMI 339 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Pandurangan (M.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... allow the appeal. In view of the observations made in paragraphs 20, 24 and 25 (see pages 112, 114 and 115) of the foregoing order, we direct that a copy of this order be forwarded to all the Competent Authorities for their information and guidance.


4
 
 
 
Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version