Chapter 15 of 15 - Corporate and Other Laws

The Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999

16 questionsasked in 8 of 13 attemptsOrder: by topic, latest first

Chapter weightageCh. 14
Questions per attemptTap a bar to filter
Dec21May22Nov22May23Nov23
September 20261(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)VISTA Chains Ltd., incorporated in 2012, is a large construction and engineering conglomerate. They are involved in nearly all heavy civil infrastructure. The Company wants to remit USD 8 million to a consultancy firm based in Germany for advisory services related to a new highway infrastructure project in India.

On the other hand, the company has taken consultancy services from Germany for upgradation of software on a different project for which it wants to remit USD 1.2 million. According to opinion of CFO, VISTA Chains Ltd. can freely remit USD 9.2 million (8 million + 1.2 million) without any kind of approval.

Decide with reference to provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, whether opinion of Mr. CFO is correct or not? (4 Marks)

May 20261(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)XYZ Ltd. is a reputed Indian construction company, which has its operations in multiple countries. The company has earned foreign exchange of USD 200 million, USD 300 million and USD 400 million during the previous three financial years respectively.

In the current year, the company intended to remit the following at the same time:

(i)USD 4 million as a contribution to a technical institution in USA conducting engineering studies in the construction field.

(ii)USD 3 million donation to creation of a chair in the memory of the company's founder in a reputed university in UK.

The directors are of the opinion that since not one of the above foreign remittance individually exceeded the limits specified by the Reserve Bank of India, no prior approval is necessary to make the above remittance. With reference to the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, determine whether XYZ Ltd. can make the above remittances without prior approval of the Reserve Bank of India. (4 Marks)

May 20266(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Answer the following referring to the provision of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999.

(i)Discuss the provision pertaining to holding of foreign exchange by resident in India. (2 Marks)

(ii)State the general rule to be understood with respect to a Current Account Transaction and Capital Account Transaction. (2 Marks)

January 20261(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)(i) Skynex Ltd., incorporated in India in 2024, is engaged in the manufacture of lithium batteries for two-wheeler. The company markets its products domestically and exports to Mexico. During the financial year 2025, the company engaged in the following transaction:

Commission paid to the agent in Mexico for the sale of the company's commercial plot in India to the tune of USD 50,000 against the inward remittance of USD 9,50,000 from Exchange Earners Foreign Currency (EEFC) Account.

Examine whether the above transaction is exempt from the approval of the RBI, with reference to the relevant provisions of FEMA, 1999.

(ii)Bob, a Director at Skynex Ltd., along with his wife, major son and father, purchased a property in Mexico, holding equal shares in the property. They collectively remitted USD 1,000,000 during the financial year. Bob confirmed that all family members complied with the applicable terms and conditions, and the amount sent is within the limit prescribed for remitting funds to Mexico.

ExaminewhetherBobandhisfamilymemberscanremit
USD 1,000,000 to Mexico in a single financial year without requiring any approval.(2 x 2 = 4 Marks)
January 20266(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Examine the given situations in the light of the FEMA, 1999:

(1)Bhargav Ltd. had total foreign exchange earnings of USD 12,000,000 in the last three financial years. What is the maximum amount the company can donate without RBI approval?

(2)Preeto Ltd. wants to make remittances 6% of investment brought into India. Does it need RBI approval? (2 + 2 = 4 Marks)

September 20251(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Heavy Loaders Ltd. is a public limited company incorporated in India and engaged in the manufacture of loader vehicles used for commercial construction purposes. It is planning to expand its business outside India and hence has come in contact with Mr. Fred, an American citizen working as an agent of companies planning to secure business in USA. Mr. Fred has informed the directors of Heavy Loaders Ltd. that another Indian company engaged in the commercial construction business has a requirement of 25 loader vehicles for its wholly owned American subsidiary company. Heavy Loaders Ltd. supplied the required loader vehicles with an invoice value of USD 350,000 in exchange of allotment of equity capital of the same worth in the American company. Mr. Fred has asked for an export agent commission of 15% of the invoice value of goods supplied from Heavy Loaders Ltd. to which Heavy Loaders Ltd. has refused the payment on grounds that maximum commission that can be paid can be 10% of the invoice value of goods supplied.

Considering the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 decide:

(i)Whether the above transaction of supplying machines in exchange of equity investments can be treated as "export" keeping in mind the absence of monetary factor in the transaction?

(ii)Whether the rate of export agent commission demanded by Mr. Fred be paid or confined to only 10% of the invoice value of goods supplied?

(4 Marks)

September 20256(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Enumerate the circumstances and the forms of business as mentioned in the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, in which a person resident outside India is absolutely prohibited from making any investments in

India. (4 Marks)

May 20251(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Mr. V is a person of Indian origin who had moved to USA along with his wife in the year 1998 and had been living there until 2024. He was holding joint bank accounts with his wife in USA since 1998. On the demise of his wife on 17th November, 2024, he had returned permanently to India on 24th November, 2024. He also inherited his wife's money after her death, which got transferred to his bank account in USA. After few days of his return to India, he has paid premium from his bank account in USA of his insurance policy, which he had taken when he was in USA. Referring to the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, examine whether Mr. V is permitted to carry out the above transactions. (4 Marks)

January 20251(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Murari Lal, a person resident outside India, has invested in four residential immovable properties under construction in Kolkata. Each property is negotiated at ₹ 2 crore, with the companies owned by builders. This amount is to be paid in two instalments as 60% on immediate basis on booking and the balance on possession of the properties.

The above transaction is done by the companies owned by builders through two brokers from USA on commission basis. Mr. Murari Lal as per the terms and conditions remitted 60% of the amount of all four immovable properties directly to the company.

Answer the following explaining the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), 1999:

(i)Whether investment by Mr. Murari Lal and payment of commission on this transaction is permissible?

(ii)How much maximum amount of commission can be paid to each broker without RBI approval?

(Ignore the USD - Rupee Exchange Rate)

January 20256(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Referring to the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, state the meaning of the term "current account transaction".

September 20246(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Mitali Diamonds Limited is a company engaged in the business of cutting, polishing and trading of diamonds in and outside India. The company exports the diamonds to USA. For the last five financial years, the foreign exchange earned by the company in exporting diamonds is as under:

FY 2023-24USD 1,25,000
FY 2022-23USD 1,10,000
FY 2021-22USD 95,000
FY 2020-21USD 98,000
FY 2019-20USD 93,000

The company wants to give donation of USD 10,000 to an institution situated in USA which provides technical support and training in the field of cutting and polishing of raw diamonds. This will help the company in guiding its own employees, posted in USA to get the requisite training.

Referring to the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, state whether the company can give donation to such institution in USA?

(4 Marks)

May 20246(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Explain the rules relating to the remittances made by persons other than individuals requiring approval of RBI as provided in Schedule III to the Foreign Exchange Management (Current Account Transactions) Rules, 2000 issued under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 in respect of the following:

(i)Commission to the agents abroad for sale of residential flats or commercial plots in India.

(ii)Remittances for consultancy services procured from outside India.

(iii)Remittances by way of reimbursement of pre-incorporation expenses.

(4 Marks)

September 20266(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Nirbhik Singh, an Indian citizen, was working in Mumbai with an Indian software company till August 2025. During the financial year 2024-25, he stayed in India for more than 250 days. In September 2025, he shifted to Singapore after accepting a five-year employment contract with a multinational technology company. Before leaving India, he opened a foreign currency account in Singapore and also purchased shares of a foreign company through overseas investment channels. Simultaneously, he continued to hold a residential apartment in Pune and maintained savings accounts with Indian banks.

Nirbhik Singh's wife, Namrata, accompanied him to Singapore but returned to India within six months due to her independent business activities in Jaipur. She established a textile export unit in India and intended to continue operating the business permanently from India. Meanwhile, Nirbhik Singh started supervising the Singapore branch office of an Indian company which was controlled by its head office in Bengaluru.

During an internal compliance review, the authorized dealer bank raised doubts regarding the residential status of both Nirbhik Singh and Namrata under FEMA. The bank particularly questioned whether Nirbhik Singh could still be regarded as a "Person Resident in India" merely because he owned assets in India and whether Namrata's temporary stay in Singapore affected her residential status under FEMA. The issue became relevant for determining the permissibility of foreign exchange transactions, overseas investments, and maintenance of foreign assets under Sections 3, 4 and 6 of FEMA.

Based on the above facts, answer the following questions:

(i)Whether Nirbhik Singh shall be treated as a "Person Resident in India" under Section 2(v) of FEMA, 1999? (2 Marks)

(ii)Whether Namrata can still be regarded as a "Person Resident in India" despite accompanying her husband to Singapore for a temporary

period? (2 Marks)

September 20241(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Ms. Rose was an Indian citizen who got a job in a software company in USA. She went to USA and stayed there for 12 years. During her stay, she purchased a house in USA for her residence. Then due to some personal issues she moved back to India and joined a software company in India. As she had moved back to India, she let out her house in USA and deposited the rent in her account in USA. Out of that amount, she purchased another house in USA.

Based on the above facts, answer the following referring to the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999.

(i)Whether Ms. Rose can purchase the house in USA and continue to retain it even after returning to India?

(ii)Whether Ms. Rose can purchase another house in USA after returning to India? (4 Marks)

May 20241(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Mr. L was employed as a fashion designer in Elegant Textile Ltd., a public limited company in Gurugram, India during the financial year 2023-24. He had efficiently provided his services for 183 days during the above said period. On 01.04.2024, Mr. H. the Human Resource Manager of Jeff Fashion Ltd., Paris (a foreign country) offered him a better employment opportunity in such company.

On 02.04.2024, Mr. L. left India for taking up employment as a production controller at Jeff Fashion Ltd. in Paris. On 30.04.2024 he flew back to India for a 10 day family function in Manali, India.

In light of the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, elucidate: The residential status of Mr. L-

(i)On his return for attending the family function on 30.04.2024.

(ii)In case, instead of vacation, he joins an employment in an Indian company after arriving on 30.04.2024. (4 Marks)

May 20256(c)4 marksNew Scheme

(c)Define "Foreign Exchange" and "Foreign Security" as per the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999. (4 Marks)