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 AT affirmed the Adjudicating Authority's finding that the cash seized from the appellant constituted benami property under the PBPT Act. The appellant failed to substantiate ownership or legitimate source of the Rs. 67,00,000/- cash, and the purported transactions and GST filings were deemed fabricated. CCTV evidence contradicted the appellant's claim of extensive sales, undermining the credibility of the bill book entries. The appellant's inconsistent statements under the Income Tax Act further weakened his position. The absence of proof establishing any fiduciary relationship precluded relief under the Act. The Tribunal held that the appellant could not rebut the presumption of benami ownership, and no error was found in the factual and legal conclusions of the Adjudicating Authority. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the provisional attachment order.
The AT affirmed the Adjudicating Authority's finding that the cash seized from the appellant constituted benami property under the PBPT Act. The appellant failed to substantiate ownership or legitimate source of the Rs. 67,00,000/- cash, and the purported transactions and GST filings were deemed fabricated. CCTV evidence contradicted the appellant's claim of extensive sales, undermining the credibility of the bill book entries. The appellant's inconsistent statements under the Income Tax Act further weakened his position. The absence of proof establishing any fiduciary relationship precluded relief under the Act. The Tribunal held that the appellant could not rebut the presumption of benami ownership, and no error was found in the factual and legal conclusions of the Adjudicating Authority. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the provisional attachment order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.