Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Reasonable belief of smuggling must rest on objective material, not mere suspicion, and a town seizure of gold by itself carries less inferential weight than seizure at a customs station or notified area. On the facts, there were no foreign markings, no evidence of the smuggling route or melting place, no corroboration from follow-up searches, and the alleged licit purchase was not disproved at the seller's end; the goods were therefore not shown to be smuggled or liable to confiscation. A retracted statement could not sustain confiscation and penalties where the procedure under Section 138B was not followed and the statement was not otherwise proved. The appellate order was affirmed and the departmental appeals were dismissed.
Reasonable belief of smuggling must rest on objective material, not mere suspicion, and a town seizure of gold by itself carries less inferential weight than seizure at a customs station or notified area. On the facts, there were no foreign markings, no evidence of the smuggling route or melting place, no corroboration from follow-up searches, and the alleged licit purchase was not disproved at the seller's end; the goods were therefore not shown to be smuggled or liable to confiscation. A retracted statement could not sustain confiscation and penalties where the procedure under Section 138B was not followed and the statement was not otherwise proved. The appellate order was affirmed and the departmental appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
