https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446201 Where confiscated goods are later sold by auction, a refund claim based on the seizure-date value requires material proving that value, and the auction valuation should first be assailed if refund is sought on that basis. The Gauhati HC noted the general principle that unlawful seizure and confiscation may justify refund at the value on the date of seizure, but found the record insufficient to establish that the seizure memo's estimated figure was the actual value. Because the goods had already been auctioned and the auction process remained unchallenged, the refund question could not be decided on the existing record, with the petitioner bearing the evidentiary burden to produce relevant value evidence. en-us Wed, 22 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Aug 2024 15:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446201 Where confiscated goods are later sold by auction, a refund claim based on the seizure-date value requires material proving that value, and the auction valuation should first be assailed if refund is sought on that basis. The Gauhati HC noted the general principle that unlawful seizure and confiscation may justify refund at the value on the date of seizure, but found the record insufficient to establish that the seizure memo's estimated figure was the actual value. Because the goods had already been auctioned and the auction process remained unchallenged, the refund question could not be decided on the existing record, with the petitioner bearing the evidentiary burden to produce relevant value evidence. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 22 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446201