TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The case involved jurisdiction for show cause notice and Order-in-Original, penalty u/s 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, and confiscation of gold jewelry. The Tribunal held that confiscation of jewelry from one individual was not appealable. Penalty was upheld for association with individuals involved in seized jewelry. The Tribunal found no issue with jurisdiction for notice and order. The notice issued within COVID-related time extensions. Commissioner's decision was deemed valid despite errors in individual analysis. Burden of proof shifted to the accused due to lack of valid explanations. Penalty upheld under Sections 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act. Appeal was dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
