1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Burden of proof in smuggling case shifts to revenue, insufficient evidence leads to dismissal.</h1> The High Court of Bombay ruled in a case involving non-notified goods that the burden of proof lies with the revenue to establish smuggling. Due to ... Smuggled goods - Non-notified goods - Burden of proof - Held that: - The law as now settled in such matters in respect of non-notified goods is that the burden is on the revenue to establish that these are smuggled goods - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. The High Court of Bombay ruled that in cases involving non-notified goods like cameras, the burden is on the revenue to prove they are smuggled. Lack of corroborative evidence led to the dismissal of the appeal. The judgment was based on factual findings, and no costs were awarded.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
