Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
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 High Court rejected the prayer to quash the summoning order against the accused applicant in a case related to illicit trade of foreign gold. The court held that the statements recorded u/s 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, from the co-accused and the applicant himself, provide sufficient evidence of their involvement in the smuggling and sale of foreign gold. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Naresh J. Sukhawani Vs. Union of India, which allows the use of a co-accused's statement as evidence against others in cases under the Customs Act. Since the case was initiated based on a private criminal complaint, the Magistrate correctly applied judicial mind and found prima facie evidence to issue the summoning order. Consequently, the High Court confirmed the validity of the summoning order dated 24.8.2023 passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, and dismissed the application filed by the accused.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
