<?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 (3) TMI 1058 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451277</link>
    <description>The Allahabad HC dismissed revenue appeals in a gold smuggling case involving confiscated gold bars worth over Rs. 1 crore. The court held that since the confiscated gold was apportioned among three assessees, the individual dispute value in each appeal fell below the Rs. 1 crore monetary limit for maintainability. Despite being granted time, revenue failed to file a supplementary affidavit establishing that revenue implications in any appeal exceeded the monetary threshold. With the Tribunal&#039;s order favoring the assessee and no cross-appeal filed, the HC found no justification for allowing revenue to maintain litigation against its own stated policy, dismissing all connected appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:24:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=748000" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 1058 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451277</link>
      <description>The Allahabad HC dismissed revenue appeals in a gold smuggling case involving confiscated gold bars worth over Rs. 1 crore. The court held that since the confiscated gold was apportioned among three assessees, the individual dispute value in each appeal fell below the Rs. 1 crore monetary limit for maintainability. Despite being granted time, revenue failed to file a supplementary affidavit establishing that revenue implications in any appeal exceeded the monetary threshold. With the Tribunal&#039;s order favoring the assessee and no cross-appeal filed, the HC found no justification for allowing revenue to maintain litigation against its own stated policy, dismissing all connected appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451277</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>