https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768158 The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, ruling that penalties under Section 112(a) and 112(b)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 were unsustainable. The decision relied on a previous Tribunal ruling (upheld by the HC of Andhra Pradesh) which found insufficient evidence that the gold in question was smuggled. Consequently, the confiscation of Rs. 32,75,000/- cash under Section 121 was deemed untenable. The Tribunal emphasized that the Department failed to meet its burden of proof in establishing the smuggled nature of the gold, making both the penalties and cash confiscation legally unsupportable. en-us Thu, 27 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Apr 2025 08:35:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768158 The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, ruling that penalties under Section 112(a) and 112(b)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 were unsustainable. The decision relied on a previous Tribunal ruling (upheld by the HC of Andhra Pradesh) which found insufficient evidence that the gold in question was smuggled. Consequently, the confiscation of Rs. 32,75,000/- cash under Section 121 was deemed untenable. The Tribunal emphasized that the Department failed to meet its burden of proof in establishing the smuggled nature of the gold, making both the penalties and cash confiscation legally unsupportable. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 27 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768158