<?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>1985 (5) TMI 245 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173731</link>
    <description>Section 138-B of the Customs Act applies only to statements recorded before a gazetted customs officer when the maker is dead, untraceable, incapable of giving evidence, kept away by the adverse party, or examined in the interests of justice. A co-accused in the same proceeding is not &quot;incapable of giving evidence&quot; within that provision. Its statement or confession is, at most, weak corroborative material and cannot by itself found criminal liability or sustain a charge. Independent prima facie evidence must first exist before any limited corroborative use can be made of such a statement. On that basis, a co-accused&#039;s statement alone could not justify framing charge against the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2015 18:14:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=398176" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (5) TMI 245 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173731</link>
      <description>Section 138-B of the Customs Act applies only to statements recorded before a gazetted customs officer when the maker is dead, untraceable, incapable of giving evidence, kept away by the adverse party, or examined in the interests of justice. A co-accused in the same proceeding is not &quot;incapable of giving evidence&quot; within that provision. Its statement or confession is, at most, weak corroborative material and cannot by itself found criminal liability or sustain a charge. Independent prima facie evidence must first exist before any limited corroborative use can be made of such a statement. On that basis, a co-accused&#039;s statement alone could not justify framing charge against the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173731</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>