https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78209 The High Court considered a case involving smuggling of gold under Sections 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(b) of The Customs Act, 1962. The petitioners were found in possession of 4.200 kgs of gold valued at Rs. 2,25,54,000 without permission, admitted to smuggling, and were intercepted while passing through the green channel. The gold was seized and confiscated. The 2nd petitioner, an unsuspecting traveler, was granted a lenient view as she was unaware of the smuggling plan and lacked knowledge of Indian laws. She deposited Rs. 10,00,000 and has a son receiving medical treatment in Malaysia. Due to an Extradition Treaty, the Court allowed the return of the 2nd petitioner's Malaysian passport with conditions, while confirming the decision against the 1st petitioner. The criminal revision case was partially allowed. en-us Thu, 06 Jun 2024 08:22:24 +0530 Thu, 06 Jun 2024 08:22:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78209 The High Court considered a case involving smuggling of gold under Sections 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(b) of The Customs Act, 1962. The petitioners were found in possession of 4.200 kgs of gold valued at Rs. 2,25,54,000 without permission, admitted to smuggling, and were intercepted while passing through the green channel. The gold was seized and confiscated. The 2nd petitioner, an unsuspecting traveler, was granted a lenient view as she was unaware of the smuggling plan and lacked knowledge of Indian laws. She deposited Rs. 10,00,000 and has a son receiving medical treatment in Malaysia. Due to an Extradition Treaty, the Court allowed the return of the 2nd petitioner's Malaysian passport with conditions, while confirming the decision against the 1st petitioner. The criminal revision case was partially allowed. Highlights Customs Thu, 06 Jun 2024 08:22:24 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78209