https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72354 Recovery of gold from the appellant's person was upheld because the seizure was effected after a customs sepoy detected a hard object tied to the waist, and the search was conducted in the presence of panch witnesses; objections to the panchnama and witness credibility were not substantiated. The appellant's acquittal in the criminal case did not bar departmental adjudication, as criminal proceedings and departmental proceedings operate independently. The acquittal therefore did not nullify the evidence supporting confiscation and penalty, which were sustained on the material before the adjudicating authority. en-us Thu, 22 May 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 May 2011 17:28:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72354 Recovery of gold from the appellant's person was upheld because the seizure was effected after a customs sepoy detected a hard object tied to the waist, and the search was conducted in the presence of panch witnesses; objections to the panchnama and witness credibility were not substantiated. The appellant's acquittal in the criminal case did not bar departmental adjudication, as criminal proceedings and departmental proceedings operate independently. The acquittal therefore did not nullify the evidence supporting confiscation and penalty, which were sustained on the material before the adjudicating authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 May 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72354