https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116422 The appellant successfully appealed the confiscation of foreign and Indian currency seized under Regulation 7(4) of the FEM (E & I) Regulations. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in finding the appellant guilty of attempting to smuggle out currency, as there was no evidence of overt acts constituting such an attempt. The judgment emphasized the distinction between preparation and attempt in criminal law, requiring both intention and actus reus. Additionally, the Commissioner failed to address the confiscation of Indian currency, leading to the appellant's exoneration and the directive to release the seized currency. en-us Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:33:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116422 The appellant successfully appealed the confiscation of foreign and Indian currency seized under Regulation 7(4) of the FEM (E & I) Regulations. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in finding the appellant guilty of attempting to smuggle out currency, as there was no evidence of overt acts constituting such an attempt. The judgment emphasized the distinction between preparation and attempt in criminal law, requiring both intention and actus reus. Additionally, the Commissioner failed to address the confiscation of Indian currency, leading to the appellant's exoneration and the directive to release the seized currency. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116422