Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Recovered foreign-origin gold bars concealed in specially created vehicle cavities, coupled with no lawful-possession documents and fabricated supporting papers, gave customs officers reasonable ground to treat the goods as smuggled. The statutory reverse burden then shifted to the appellants, but they failed to prove lawful origin or rebut the electronic and documentary material linking them to the supplier and recipient. Applying the preponderance of probability standard, the Tribunal sustained confiscation of the gold and vehicle and affirmed the penalties. It also rejected the Section 138B objection because the statements were corroborated by independent evidence, and found no natural justice violation from denial of cross-examination, as no prejudice was shown.
Recovered foreign-origin gold bars concealed in specially created vehicle cavities, coupled with no lawful-possession documents and fabricated supporting papers, gave customs officers reasonable ground to treat the goods as smuggled. The statutory reverse burden then shifted to the appellants, but they failed to prove lawful origin or rebut the electronic and documentary material linking them to the supplier and recipient. Applying the preponderance of probability standard, the Tribunal sustained confiscation of the gold and vehicle and affirmed the penalties. It also rejected the Section 138B objection because the statements were corroborated by independent evidence, and found no natural justice violation from denial of cross-examination, as no prejudice was shown.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.