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
Law
Court
Citation -
Landmark
Order by
 

 

FEMA - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 573 Records

  • 2018 (2) TMI 762 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Lalit Kumar Modi Versus Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement & Others

    Right to cross-examine - Cross examine the witnesses whose statements were recorded under Section 37 of FEMA and whose statements have been relied upon in the complaint - complaint alleges that the provisions of section 3(b) of the FEMA have been contravened by the petitioner by making a payment to Cricket South Africa (CSA) a person residing outside India, without permission of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and that is inter alia apparent from....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 579 - ATFEMA

    Sh. Kamlesh B. Rawal Versus The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

    Abetting one Sh. P.G. Rawal in transferring foreign exchange in contravention of Section 8(3) read with 8(4) and Section 48 read with Section 64(2) - Held that - While the order in original has passed a very detailed order, however the adjudicating authority has not given any evidence or facts to state as to how the appellant has abetted with Sh. P.G. Rawal, in the said contravention. It appears that he has based his judgment on an inference from....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 333 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Bimal Kumar Jain Versus The Directorate of Enforcement

    Offence under FEMA - reject the petitioner s application for cross-examination - Held that - A plain reading of the application filed by the petitioner seeking cross-examination of certain individuals named above also indicates that the petitioner had reiterated its contention that the material or evidence on record does not substantiate the allegation made against him. At the outset, the petitioner had denied all the allegations made against him....... + More


  • 2018 (1) TMI 1222 - ATFEMA

    P.A. Noushad Versus The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Cochin

    Contravention of section 3 FEMA - statement made under oath reliance - Held that - In harwala transactions, the main aspect is secrecy and stealth. Most of the facts relating to such transactions remain in the knowledge of the persons involved in such transactions. It is difficult for Authorities to unravel every link of such transitions. The burden is on the person to explain; otherwise adverse inference can be drawn based on surrounding facts a....... + More


  • 2018 (1) TMI 568 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Union of India Through Competent Authority Versus Abbasbhai Mulla Fazle Abbas And 10

    Brother of the present respondent was detained under the provisions COFEPOSA Act - Held that - No substance in any such ground for the simple reason that the law is well settled as interpreted and decided by the Honourable Supreme Court. The petitioner has also tried to compare several other judgments and Special Act like TADA and NDPS Act to plead and to induce by this Court to believe that it would be difficult to get direct evidence to control....... + More


  • 2018 (1) TMI 221 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Silicon Graphics Systems India Private Limited Versus Special Director of Enforcement & Ors.

    Application for dispensation and directing appellant to deposit 10 of the penalty amount and to furnish a credible security for the balance 50 - Held that - On the one hand the appellant contends its financial credibility and on the other hand undue economic hardship. The Tribunal has waived off substantial pre-deposit and has directed only 10 of the penalty amount to be deposited with a surety for the balance 50 which cannot be said to be undue ....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 396 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Union of India Versus Shri Yogesh Mehta And Another, Sh. Hemal Thakkar

    Revisional jurisdiction under the FERA - Notice of contravention of Section 51 of FERA was taken by the Adjudicating officer within two years from the date of the repeal of FERA - Held that - In the facts of the present case, the appellant is not without a remedy in the sense that a recourse can be taken to the remedies under the Constitution of India. The principle which governs Mimansa interpretation is that if a word or sentence purporting to ....... + More


  • 2017 (11) TMI 839 - ATFEMA

    Union of India Directorate of Enforcement, New Delhi Versus Shri Tasveer Asgar Khan

    Revision petition u/s 19(6) of FEMA against the order of penalty - contentions of the respondent is that revision petition filed by the revisionist is not maintainable as there is no specific provision in the Act - Held that - As gone through provisions of section 16 which provides for appointment of Central Government Officers as at Adjudicating Authority for holding an inquiry for the purpose of imposing any penalty against the respondent. As i....... + More


  • 2017 (11) TMI 618 - ATFEMA

    Shri P. Narayan Iyer Versus The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

    Non-realisation of export sale proceeds - Proceedings as contemplated under Section 18(2) & 18(3) read with Section 68(1) & 68(2) of FERA - Held that - It is evident that the Appellant joined as Director solely in the capacity of advisory role and was specifically excluded from the day to day operations of the company as evidenced from the correspondence. There cannot be any adverse inference against the Appellant‟s role as to its i....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 1129 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    Shri D. Venugopal S/o D.V. Prasad, Devas Multimedia Private Limited, Shri M. Umesh Versus The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, The Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement

    Investigation and enquiry into violation of FEMA and the Rules and Regulations - Held that - Any investigation undertaken with an intention to unearth violations of provisions of FEMA cannot be characterized as motivated or malicious merely because before initiation of such proceeding, an award had been passed against the Central Government regarding alleged breach of contract entered into between the Government and the Company. Alleged breach of....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 909 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Dr. R.N. Gupta Technical Educational Society Versus Union of India

    Registration under Section 12 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 ( FCRA ) rejected - Grant of certificate of registration under FCRA - the respondent is not satisfied that the foreign contribution is not likely to be used for personal gains - petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and has been registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act - Held that - The question whether a society esta....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 908 - ATFEMA

    M/s. Dinmay Exim Avenue (P) Ltd., Roshni Rawat, Dinesh Chandra Rawat Versus The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata

    Review application - Held that - It is pertinent to mention that the order dated 16.07.2016 has not been challenged by the appellant/applicants in the higher court. It has become final. The amount fixed in the said order has not been deposited and it is apparent that the appellants have no intention to deposit the same. - We are of the view that the review application filed by the appellant/review applicant is not maintainable as the applicant ha....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 461 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Nitin Sandesara Versus Directorate of Enforcement And Ors.

    Detention at the airport at the instance of the Enforcement Directorate - Look Out Circular (LOC) was issued by the Enforcement Directorate - violation of FEMA - Proceedings under PMLA - Held that - In the present case, the LOC does not indicate any credible reason for issuing the same. Plainly, recourse to LOC cannot be taken as a matter of course; restricting the right of a citizen to travel is a serious imposition on his/her fundamental rights....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 460 - ATFEMA

    M/s. Wadhwa Enterprises, Shri Sanjeev Wadhwa, Shri Rajeev Wadhwa Versus The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

    Condonation of Delay - reason i.e. the premises of the appellant firm lying locked and shifting of residence by the appellants as well as the chamber of the counsel of the appellant has been stated - Held that - As stated earlier, by an order dated 11th May, 2009 this Tribunal had directed the appellants to deposit 20 of their amount of penalty along with submissions of unconditional bank guarantee of remaining 30 within a period of 45 days from ....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 459 - ATFEMA

    Shri P.R. Ganapathy Versus The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

    Proceedings contemplated under Section 51 of FERA, 1973 - Held that - In the case of Shri Joji Thelliankal, who had acted as an agent to identify NRE account holders, there was no fool proof evidence on record, to establish that Shri Joji Thelliankal received premium amount and thus it was found by the trial court that there is no corroborative evidence except the statements. It was held that no other evidence on the records placed to show that S....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 352 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    M/s Wood Tech Consultants Private Limited Versus Joint Director of Enforcement Office of The Joint Director of Enforcement, Government of India

    Partially dispensing with deposit of the penalty amount - order passed exercising the power under second proviso to Section 19(1) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 - Held that - It is relevant to state that an appeal would lie to the High Court under Section 35 of the Act on any question of law arising out of the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal. On the facts of the case, it can t be said that the discretion exercised by the Appe....... + More


  • 2017 (9) TMI 491 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    M/s. Lord Chloro Alkali Versus Special Director Enforcement Directorate

    Offence under Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 - penalty imposed - reason to believe for default - Held that - From the perusal of the SCN, it is clear that the, details furnished by the respondent department in the SCN, were vague and sketchy at best, for the appellant to trace back the contentious transaction of DM16000, which happened eight years back with respect to the time when the first letter was sent to the appellant Company by the ....... + More


  • 2017 (9) TMI 127 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Rajendra Kumar Patel Versus Union Of India

    Interest on the amount of the Award - Payment of actual rate of interest earned by the respondent on the amount seized and confiscated from the petitioner - accretion to the amount seized from the petitioner - Held that - In the present case it is admitted that the respondent had received interest amounting to ₹1,64,52,470/- on the separate fixed deposit created from the currency seized. However, it is seen that the respondent has paid only....... + More


  • 2017 (8) TMI 1307 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

    Shabnam Arora Versus Union of India & Anr.

    Detention orders - Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 ( COFEPOSA Act ) against the husband of the petitioner - Held that - No ground to interfere with the impugned order oh HC 2017 (7) TMI 73 - DELHI HIGH COURT . SLP dismised. - HC has held that as discussed the role and position of the detenue in the smuggling ring. The detenue was not a mere carrier and was in-charge of the Delhi operations of the ....... + More


  • 2017 (8) TMI 1016 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    N.L. Dubasia & 1 Versus Union of India THR' & 2

    Provision of Section 78 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 and Section 44 of the Act applicability - Held that - The petitioner who had come to India from foreign country, wanted that their NRI Account/FCNR Account may be continued in the same status. It was a kind of privilege claimed. Such status could be accorded only within the permissible parameters and in accordance with law by the Reserve Bank of India. It is difficult to conceiv....... + More


1........
 
 
 
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