Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2000 (7) TMI 177 - AT - Customs

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Customs Act appeal success: Confiscation orders overturned for gold coins and currency. Evidence supports legal import. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the confiscation orders for gold coins, gold biscuit, and Indian currency under the Customs Act. The ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Customs Act appeal success: Confiscation orders overturned for gold coins and currency. Evidence supports legal import.

                          The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the confiscation orders for gold coins, gold biscuit, and Indian currency under the Customs Act. The appellant's statement was deemed unreliable due to coercion and physical torture by DRI officers. Evidence, including baggage receipts and affidavits, supported the appellant's claim of legal import. The discrepancies in the receipts were considered minor. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and relief was granted to the appellant.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Confiscation of gold coins and gold biscuit under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962.
                          2. Confiscation of Indian currency under Section 121 of the Customs Act, 1962.
                          3. Admissibility and reliability of the appellant's statement dated 6-8-1992.
                          4. Validity of baggage receipts and other evidence provided by the appellant.
                          5. Allegations of coercion and physical torture by DRI officers.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Confiscation of Gold Coins and Gold Biscuit:
                          The Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi, ordered the absolute confiscation of 2432 gold coins and one foreign-marked gold biscuit under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant was unable to produce any document to show licit import of the gold during the search conducted by DRI officers on 6-8-1992. The appellant admitted in his statement that these items were part of smuggled gold received from Dubai and sold in India.

                          2. Confiscation of Indian Currency:
                          An amount of Rs. 22,30,000/- was confiscated under Section 121 of the Customs Act, 1962, as it was deemed to be the sale proceeds of smuggled gold. The appellant claimed that this amount was the commission from the sale of smuggled gold coins.

                          3. Admissibility and Reliability of the Appellant's Statement:
                          The appellant argued that his statement dated 6-8-1992 was obtained under coercion and physical torture by DRI officers. Evidence including a letter dated 7-8-1992 to the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) and a medical report from the Central Jail, Tihar, supported the appellant's claim of physical injuries. The Tribunal found that the statement was indeed obtained under coercion and could not be relied upon.

                          4. Validity of Baggage Receipts and Other Evidence:
                          The appellant provided baggage receipts and affidavits from NRIs to prove the licit import of the gold coins and gold biscuit. The NRIs confirmed that they had brought the gold coins to India and entrusted them to the appellant for sale. The Tribunal found that these documents, along with the statements and affidavits, made the appellant's claim of legal import plausible. Discrepancies in the baggage receipts were considered clerical errors and did not significantly undermine their evidentiary value.

                          5. Allegations of Coercion and Physical Torture:
                          The Tribunal examined the appellant's claim of coercion and physical torture. The medical report and the appellant's letter to the ACMM corroborated the allegations of physical injuries inflicted by DRI officers. The Tribunal concluded that the initial statement dated 6-8-1992 was retracted and obtained under coercion, making it unreliable.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order for the following reasons:
                          (i) The statement relied upon by the Department was retracted and obtained under coercion, making it unreliable.
                          (ii) The evidence produced by the appellant, including baggage receipts, statements, and affidavits of NRIs, made the claim of legal import plausible.
                          (iii) The discrepancies in the baggage receipts did not significantly undermine their evidentiary value.

                          Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and any consequential relief was directed to be provided to the appellant.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found