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...
CESTAT allowed the appeal, quashed the impugned order of confiscation and set aside penalties imposed under s.112 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal held that the revenue failed to discharge the statutory burden under s.123 to prove the goods were smuggled or of foreign/Nepali origin; no admissible expert opinion or evidentiary material was produced to establish foreign origin, and the appellant's contemporaneous purchase records from local farmers were not refuted by concrete findings. Because the seized peas are not specified under s.123, confiscation could not be sustained on the record, and the consequential penal imposition under s.112 was accordingly annulled.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, quashed the impugned order of confiscation and set aside penalties imposed under s.112 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal held that the revenue failed to discharge the statutory burden under s.123 to prove the goods were smuggled or of foreign/Nepali origin; no admissible expert opinion or evidentiary material was produced to establish foreign origin, and the appellant's contemporaneous purchase records from local farmers were not refuted by concrete findings. Because the seized peas are not specified under s.123, confiscation could not be sustained on the record, and the consequential penal imposition under s.112 was accordingly annulled.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
