<?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>1983 (6) TMI 201 - CEGAT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166861</link>
    <description>Confiscation of smuggled gold may be sustained on circumstantial evidence and statutory presumptions under the Evidence Act even where Section 123 of the Customs Act is not applied. The Tribunal treated possession of foreign-marked gold, the improbability of the explanation, and the surrounding circumstances as sufficient, so no referable question of law arose on that aspect. The statement recorded from the appellant was held voluntary and true on facts, leaving no legal issue on admissibility. A later show cause notice was not treated as a fresh notice for limitation purposes, and a technical criminal acquittal did not nullify the customs adjudication or the confiscation order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 25 Jun 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2014 15:37:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368513" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (6) TMI 201 - CEGAT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166861</link>
      <description>Confiscation of smuggled gold may be sustained on circumstantial evidence and statutory presumptions under the Evidence Act even where Section 123 of the Customs Act is not applied. The Tribunal treated possession of foreign-marked gold, the improbability of the explanation, and the surrounding circumstances as sufficient, so no referable question of law arose on that aspect. The statement recorded from the appellant was held voluntary and true on facts, leaving no legal issue on admissibility. A later show cause notice was not treated as a fresh notice for limitation purposes, and a technical criminal acquittal did not nullify the customs adjudication or the confiscation order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 25 Jun 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166861</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>