<?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>2012 (5) TMI 722 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186260</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to set aside the order for confiscation of seized goods and imposition of penalty under the Customs Act. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence proving the goods were smuggled and highlighted the burden on the Revenue to establish such allegations. The Court discussed the required proof for establishing goods as smuggled and concluded that confiscation cannot be justified solely on the absence of knowledge or documents regarding duty payment without evidence of smuggling. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law necessitating determination was found.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440915" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 722 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186260</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to set aside the order for confiscation of seized goods and imposition of penalty under the Customs Act. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence proving the goods were smuggled and highlighted the burden on the Revenue to establish such allegations. The Court discussed the required proof for establishing goods as smuggled and concluded that confiscation cannot be justified solely on the absence of knowledge or documents regarding duty payment without evidence of smuggling. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law necessitating determination was found.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186260</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>