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.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Appellant proved ownership of gold bars through valid invoices, discharging initial onus. Revenue failed to establish invoices unrelated to seized gold, lacking inquiry into consideration paid. Foreign origin and smuggled nature of gold not conclusively established beyond relying on Appellant's statements, which were hearsay. Lack of corroborative substantive evidence renders hearsay inadmissible. Revenue's case based on presumptions and assumptions instead of substantive evidence. Since gold not liable for confiscation, penalty u/s 112(b) on Appellant set aside. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.