Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
HC held that under Section 123 of Customs Act, 1962, the burden of proving non-smuggled status of seized goods lies with the person from whose possession the goods were seized. In this case, crude gold bars of foreign origin were confiscated. The CESTAT's order was set aside, with the penalty reduced to Rs. 1,00,000 for the respondent, who was deemed a carrier. The gold valued at Rs. 91,98,090 remains confiscated as the respondent failed to prove legitimate acquisition. The civil miscellaneous appeal was allowed, partially modifying the original penalty while upholding the confiscation order.
HC held that under Section 123 of Customs Act, 1962, the burden of proving non-smuggled status of seized goods lies with the person from whose possession the goods were seized. In this case, crude gold bars of foreign origin were confiscated. The CESTAT's order was set aside, with the penalty reduced to Rs. 1,00,000 for the respondent, who was deemed a carrier. The gold valued at Rs. 91,98,090 remains confiscated as the respondent failed to prove legitimate acquisition. The civil miscellaneous appeal was allowed, partially modifying the original penalty while upholding the confiscation order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
