https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437340 The court upheld the invocation of Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962, placing the burden of proof on the appellants to demonstrate that the gold in their possession was not smuggled. The gold, being of foreign origin and lacking documentation of legal importation, was deemed liable for confiscation under Sections 111(d), 111(p), and 111(i). Furthermore, the appellants were found liable for penalties under Section 112(b) for dealing with goods they knew or should have known were subject to confiscation. All six appeals were dismissed, and the adjudication authorities' findings were affirmed in favor of the Revenue. en-us Tue, 02 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Nov 2023 11:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437340 The court upheld the invocation of Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962, placing the burden of proof on the appellants to demonstrate that the gold in their possession was not smuggled. The gold, being of foreign origin and lacking documentation of legal importation, was deemed liable for confiscation under Sections 111(d), 111(p), and 111(i). Furthermore, the appellants were found liable for penalties under Section 112(b) for dealing with goods they knew or should have known were subject to confiscation. All six appeals were dismissed, and the adjudication authorities' findings were affirmed in favor of the Revenue. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 02 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437340