<?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>Silver Seizure Overturned: Insufficient Evidence and Procedural Flaws Invalidate Confiscation of Small Quantity Below Threshold</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87616</link>
    <description>CESTAT allowed the appeal, finding the silver granules seizure unwarranted. The 10 kg silver, below the 100 kg threshold, was improperly seized by a Superintendent lacking competent authority. The department failed to establish smuggling evidence, while the appellant demonstrated legitimate purchase through invoice. The adjudicating authority violated principles of natural justice by denying cross-examination, relying solely on one-sided testimony. Consequently, the tribunal nullified both the confiscation order and imposed penalty, emphasizing procedural irregularities and lack of substantive proof of illicit intent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2025 08:41:42 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2025 08:41:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=816033" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Silver Seizure Overturned: Insufficient Evidence and Procedural Flaws Invalidate Confiscation of Small Quantity Below Threshold</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87616</link>
      <description>CESTAT allowed the appeal, finding the silver granules seizure unwarranted. The 10 kg silver, below the 100 kg threshold, was improperly seized by a Superintendent lacking competent authority. The department failed to establish smuggling evidence, while the appellant demonstrated legitimate purchase through invoice. The adjudicating authority violated principles of natural justice by denying cross-examination, relying solely on one-sided testimony. Consequently, the tribunal nullified both the confiscation order and imposed penalty, emphasizing procedural irregularities and lack of substantive proof of illicit intent.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2025 08:41:42 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87616</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>