https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271044 The court upheld the confiscation of the appellants' vehicles and imposition of penalties, emphasizing the importance of circumstantial evidence and consistency in the drivers' statements. The court found the appellants involved in smuggling activities based on the drivers' detailed and consistent statements, lack of retraction, and failure to request cross-examination. The judgment reinforced legal principles in smuggling cases, highlighting reliance on probability and circumstantial evidence. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the confiscation and penalties imposed by the Adjudicating authority. en-us Fri, 18 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:03:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271044 The court upheld the confiscation of the appellants' vehicles and imposition of penalties, emphasizing the importance of circumstantial evidence and consistency in the drivers' statements. The court found the appellants involved in smuggling activities based on the drivers' detailed and consistent statements, lack of retraction, and failure to request cross-examination. The judgment reinforced legal principles in smuggling cases, highlighting reliance on probability and circumstantial evidence. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the confiscation and penalties imposed by the Adjudicating authority. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 18 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271044