<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1986 (2) TMI 188 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72205</link>
    <description>Confiscation and personal penalty under the Customs Act were unsustainable where the authorities failed to establish the legal basis for seizure and confiscation of goods found in residential premises. The appellant&#039;s explanation for possession and character of the goods was accepted on the facts, and the record showed that part of the seizure had already been treated as legally acquired on supporting affidavits and documents. Because the authorities did not properly address whether the goods were notified goods and the confiscation order suffered from infirmities, the confiscation, reduced penalty, and consequential relief of refund and return of the seized goods were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 May 2011 12:21:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110484" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (2) TMI 188 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72205</link>
      <description>Confiscation and personal penalty under the Customs Act were unsustainable where the authorities failed to establish the legal basis for seizure and confiscation of goods found in residential premises. The appellant&#039;s explanation for possession and character of the goods was accepted on the facts, and the record showed that part of the seizure had already been treated as legally acquired on supporting affidavits and documents. Because the authorities did not properly address whether the goods were notified goods and the confiscation order suffered from infirmities, the confiscation, reduced penalty, and consequential relief of refund and return of the seized goods were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72205</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>