Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The CESTAT held that the 352 rolls of coated textile fabric seized from the appellant's warehouse were not notified goods under Section 123 of the Act, nor were they seized at a port, airport, or international border. Consequently, the burden to prove smuggling rested on the Revenue, which failed to discharge this burden. Therefore, the confiscation proceedings were unsustainable, and neither redemption fine nor penalty could be imposed. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.
The CESTAT held that the 352 rolls of coated textile fabric seized from the appellant's warehouse were not notified goods under Section 123 of the Act, nor were they seized at a port, airport, or international border. Consequently, the burden to prove smuggling rested on the Revenue, which failed to discharge this burden. Therefore, the confiscation proceedings were unsustainable, and neither redemption fine nor penalty could be imposed. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
