https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125774 The appellant successfully challenged the Commissioner's order alleging illegal import of goods from Singapore to Delhi. The appellant argued that the burden of proof lay with the department, which failed to provide concrete evidence of wrongdoing. After examining the record, the court found no discrepancies in the import process and ruled in favor of the appellant. The judgment emphasized the importance of proof over suspicion, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order in favor of the appellant. Both appeals were allowed, resulting in a favorable outcome for the appellants. en-us Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Oct 2012 10:38:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125774 The appellant successfully challenged the Commissioner's order alleging illegal import of goods from Singapore to Delhi. The appellant argued that the burden of proof lay with the department, which failed to provide concrete evidence of wrongdoing. After examining the record, the court found no discrepancies in the import process and ruled in favor of the appellant. The judgment emphasized the importance of proof over suspicion, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order in favor of the appellant. Both appeals were allowed, resulting in a favorable outcome for the appellants. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125774