<?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>2003 (12) TMI 462 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111090</link>
    <description>Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 could not be invoked merely because foreign-marked gold coins were recovered from a locker; the department had to first establish a reasonable basis for treating the coins as smuggled and for shifting the burden to the respondent. The tribunal noted that the surrounding circumstances did not show meaningful customs enquiry or investigation before proceeding, and the explanation that the coins were received as gifts was not inherently incredible. The identical appearance of the coins also did not, by itself, discredit that explanation. The benefit of doubt granted by the appellate authority was therefore upheld and confiscation was not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 12:44:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148106" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 462 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111090</link>
      <description>Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 could not be invoked merely because foreign-marked gold coins were recovered from a locker; the department had to first establish a reasonable basis for treating the coins as smuggled and for shifting the burden to the respondent. The tribunal noted that the surrounding circumstances did not show meaningful customs enquiry or investigation before proceeding, and the explanation that the coins were received as gifts was not inherently incredible. The identical appearance of the coins also did not, by itself, discredit that explanation. The benefit of doubt granted by the appellate authority was therefore upheld and confiscation was not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111090</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>