<?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>1991 (9) TMI 79 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43120</link>
    <description>Recovery of gold biscuits with foreign markings from a concealed cavity, together with the seizure circumstances and the accused&#039;s admissible statements, was sufficient to sustain conviction under the Customs Act and the Gold (Control) Act because the facts attracted the statutory burden under Section 123. The surrounding circumstances, including concealment and high-purity foreign-marked gold, supported the prosecution case and the conviction of Rohit Kumar was restored. By contrast, Kapil Mehra could not be convicted merely for travelling with the co-accused or being related to him, as no incriminating article was recovered from him and there was no proof of conscious possession or individual culpability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 12:07:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81649" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (9) TMI 79 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43120</link>
      <description>Recovery of gold biscuits with foreign markings from a concealed cavity, together with the seizure circumstances and the accused&#039;s admissible statements, was sufficient to sustain conviction under the Customs Act and the Gold (Control) Act because the facts attracted the statutory burden under Section 123. The surrounding circumstances, including concealment and high-purity foreign-marked gold, supported the prosecution case and the conviction of Rohit Kumar was restored. By contrast, Kapil Mehra could not be convicted merely for travelling with the co-accused or being related to him, as no incriminating article was recovered from him and there was no proof of conscious possession or individual culpability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>