<?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>1974 (12) TMI 40 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41371</link>
    <description>Knowing possession and clandestine carriage of gold were held sufficient to infer illegal import and liability to confiscation under the Customs Act, so the conviction was sustained. Even if the statutory customs presumption did not strictly apply, the Court upheld the finding on circumstantial evidence, including the appellant&#039;s conduct, implausible explanation, failure to identify a source, and his own admission that transporting the gold was an offence. The alleged defect in examination under section 342 CrPC was treated as technical because no prejudice was shown. The conviction was maintained, but the sentence was reduced to the period already undergone.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=79902" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (12) TMI 40 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41371</link>
      <description>Knowing possession and clandestine carriage of gold were held sufficient to infer illegal import and liability to confiscation under the Customs Act, so the conviction was sustained. Even if the statutory customs presumption did not strictly apply, the Court upheld the finding on circumstantial evidence, including the appellant&#039;s conduct, implausible explanation, failure to identify a source, and his own admission that transporting the gold was an offence. The alleged defect in examination under section 342 CrPC was treated as technical because no prejudice was shown. The conviction was maintained, but the sentence was reduced to the period already undergone.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41371</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>