<?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>2024 (1) TMI 986 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448587</link>
    <description>CESTAT Ahmedabad set aside penalties and confiscation orders against appellant in red sander wood smuggling case. Tribunal found adjudicating authority relied on disputed confessional statements obtained under duress without determining their voluntariness, ignored appellant&#039;s retraction through affidavit, and denied cross-examination of key witnesses. Cross-examination of marble company officials revealed appellant had no role in alleged smuggling activities. Regarding confiscated cash of Rs. 7,50,000, tribunal held revenue failed to prove money represented sale proceeds of smuggled goods despite appellant producing bank statements justifying cash withdrawal. Absolute confiscation was contrary to law without establishing connection to smuggling proceeds. Appeal allowed with directions to release seized currency.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2024 07:56:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=741131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 986 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448587</link>
      <description>CESTAT Ahmedabad set aside penalties and confiscation orders against appellant in red sander wood smuggling case. Tribunal found adjudicating authority relied on disputed confessional statements obtained under duress without determining their voluntariness, ignored appellant&#039;s retraction through affidavit, and denied cross-examination of key witnesses. Cross-examination of marble company officials revealed appellant had no role in alleged smuggling activities. Regarding confiscated cash of Rs. 7,50,000, tribunal held revenue failed to prove money represented sale proceeds of smuggled goods despite appellant producing bank statements justifying cash withdrawal. Absolute confiscation was contrary to law without establishing connection to smuggling proceeds. Appeal allowed with directions to release seized currency.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448587</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>