Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Smuggling - Seized 2332.800 gm of foreign marked gold - confiscation - Burden of proof - The Tribunal held that the appellant’s have satisfactorily discharged the burden cast upon them in law, u/s 123 of the Customs Act and have demonstrated the licit possession of seized gold. On the other hand the department has failed in irrefutably demonstrating any falsity in the evidence supplied by the appellant noticee. - Thus, for want of the same the seizure and the ultimate confiscation of the 20 gold bars is not warranted. It being therefore unlawful is liable to be set aside.
Smuggling - Seized 2332.800 gm of foreign marked gold - confiscation - Burden of proof - The Tribunal held that the appellant’s have satisfactorily discharged the burden cast upon them in law, u/s 123 of the Customs Act and have demonstrated the licit possession of seized gold. On the other hand the department has failed in irrefutably demonstrating any falsity in the evidence supplied by the appellant noticee. - Thus, for want of the same the seizure and the ultimate confiscation of the 20 gold bars is not warranted. It being therefore unlawful is liable to be set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.