<?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>2005 (4) TMI 382 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115352</link>
    <description>Betelnuts not covered by Section 123 or Chapter IVA of the Customs Act remained subject to the normal burden on the Revenue to prove smuggled character, and confiscation could not rest on suspicion alone. Because the record lacked corroborative evidence of foreign origin or illegal import, and no reliable test or other proof was produced, confiscation of the goods and penalty were unsustainable. Confiscation of the vehicle also required proof that it was used to transport smuggled goods with the knowledge of the driver or owner, which was not established. The goods, vehicle, and penalty were set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 13:23:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152351" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 382 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115352</link>
      <description>Betelnuts not covered by Section 123 or Chapter IVA of the Customs Act remained subject to the normal burden on the Revenue to prove smuggled character, and confiscation could not rest on suspicion alone. Because the record lacked corroborative evidence of foreign origin or illegal import, and no reliable test or other proof was produced, confiscation of the goods and penalty were unsustainable. Confiscation of the vehicle also required proof that it was used to transport smuggled goods with the knowledge of the driver or owner, which was not established. The goods, vehicle, and penalty were set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115352</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>