Just a moment...
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the acquittal in the prosecution for alleged illegal export and concealment of foreign currency called for interference in appeal.
Analysis: The prosecution version suffered from multiple material inconsistencies touching the place and manner of interception, the absence of supporting airport and baggage records, contradictions between the customs officer and the panch witness, and the doubtful nature of the seizure and recovery process. The evidence did not satisfactorily establish that the accused were apprehended in the manner alleged or that the currency shown in the case property corresponded with the alleged seizure. The statements recorded under customs powers, though admissible, did not by themselves discharge the prosecution burden, particularly when retracted and unsupported by reliable independent evidence. In an appeal against acquittal, the reinforced presumption of innocence and the rule that two reasonable views must favour the accused applied with full force.
Conclusion: The acquittal was not shown to be perverse or unsustainable, and no interference was warranted.