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 81 to 98 of 98 Records

  • 1995 (12) TMI 338 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Karimbai (Smt.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... iture failing payment of this amount of fine within the stipulated time, this property shall also be liable to be forfeited to the Central Government. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the appeal, and the same is disposed of in the above terms.


  • 1995 (11) TMI 380 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Yakub abdul Razaak Memon Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... As already discussed, here in this Act, there is an express limit of sixty days. We are, therefore, constrained to dismiss the application for condonation of delay. The appeal was not admitted for this reason and stands rejected being barred by time.


  • 1995 (6) TMI 185 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Abdul Majeed (VI.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... hat the order of forfeiture, in this case, of the properties owned by the appellant, is not sustainable and is liable to be quashed. We, accordingly, allow the appeal and set aside the order passed under section 7(1) of the Act on September 15, 1994.


  • 1995 (3) TMI 427 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Raghavan (P.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... justifiable material for holding against the appellant and proceeding to forfeit even his small running business of watch repairing, which is the source of his livelihood. Accordingly, we find it a fit case to allow the appeal and order accordingly.


  • 1995 (3) TMI 426 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Competent Authority Versus Kamal Narain Kapoor

    ... ...
    ... ... o of the principles relating to remand, apart from the fact that sole reliance has been placed on Rules which are no longer applicable. In view of the foregoing discussion, the present application is liable to dismissal, and is dismissed accordingly.


  • 1995 (2) TMI 358 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Thanesar Singh Sodhi Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... quisition of the properties, which are the subject-matter of forfeiture by virtue of the impugned order, have been discussed in detail by the learned Member, with which I am in full agreement. In view of the foregoing, the appeal is hereby dismissed.


  • 1994 (11) TMI 367 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Kamal Narain Kapoor and others Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... pellants are entitled to succeed on the one ground, as discussed above. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed, and the impugned order under section 7 of the Act dated March 7, 1980, and consequential order under section 19(1) of the Act, are set aside.


  • 1994 (11) TMI 366 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Hamida Beevi (Smt.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... able to be forfeited, for the aforesaid reasons. The appeal is accordingly allowed, and the forfeiture order dated October 26, 1993, under section 7(1) of the Act is set aside and so also the consequential order passed under section 19(1) of the Act.


  • 1994 (11) TMI 365 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Romil Exports Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... rces it has been rightly held to be liable to forfeiture by the competent authority, under section 68-I of the Act by order dated March 10, 1993. There is, thus no merit in appeal, and the same is liable to be dismissed, and is dismissed accordingly.


  • 1994 (9) TMI 314 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Ayesha Y. Abbobaker (Smt.) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... shall ensure that a copy of the reasons recorded, if not already supplied, is also sent to the appellant. The Competent Authority shall pass an appropriate order thereafter, within four months of the receipt of the copy of this order in his office.


  • 1994 (4) TMI 353 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Niranjan J. Shah Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... ure of the order, which is the subject-matter of the appeal, which in our view does not in any manner seriously prejudice the party, we do not feel inclined to exercise our discretion for condoning the delay. The application is accordingly dismissed.


  • 1994 (3) TMI 347 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Makhdeo Tiwari Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... we do not think that there was any bar of time to our taking up the rectification application for disposal. We accordingly dismiss the petition, barring the rectification ordered in paragraph 9 (at page 21) above of this order. No order as to costs.


  • 1992 (7) TMI 297 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Rama Devi (Smt.) and Lajwanti (Smt) Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... in the property in dispute at any stage. They have, therefore, no locus standi to file F. P. A. No. 21/(DLI) of 1992 and the same is liable to be dismissed on that ground as well. In view of discussion above, both the appeals fail and are dismissed.


  • 1992 (6) TMI 161 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Ajaib Singh Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... lant. There is nothing on record to show that any prejudice has been caused to the appellant on account of non-supply of the reasons to believe . This contention, therefore, cannot be upheld. In the result, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.


  • 1992 (5) TMI 174 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    UCO Bank Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... d the impugned order of the Competent Authority is modified to the extent that only the equity of redemption owned by Smt. S. Krishnammal (owner) in the houses detailed above shall stand forfeited to the Central Government free from all encumbrances.


  • 1992 (3) TMI 318 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Jillani Kassam Hingwala Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... fore, cannot be upheld. In view of the discussion above, the appeal is allowed and the order A freezing the shop of the appellant under section 68F read with section 68E is set aside. The possession of the shop be restored to the appellant forthwith.


  • 1992 (1) TMI 316 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

    Baij Nath Aggarwalla Versus Competent Authority

    ... ...
    ... ... ew of the discussion above, the forfeiture order of the Competent Authority, vis-a-vis, the life insurance policies, is set aside. The remaining forfeiture order of the Competent Authority shall stand. The appeal is partly allowed as indicated above.


  • 1983 (9) TMI 201 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA

    KANAYALAL BHAGNANI, CALCUTTA Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, CALCUTTA

    ... ...
    ... ... ts, we hold that the learned Collector was unjustified in directing confiscation of the cash amount and imposing the penalty. We, therefore, set aside his order and direct that the cash seized from the house of the appellant shall be returned to him.


5
 
 
 
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