https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462636 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal, setting aside confiscation of gold and penalties under Sections 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish gold was of foreign origin or smuggled, noting 99.5% purity versus typical 99.9% for foreign gold and absence of foreign markings. Appellant successfully proved domestic purchase from seller through invoices, which department failed to disprove. Section 123 burden of proof was discharged by appellant. Additionally, show cause notice was issued beyond six-month limitation period without proper extension order service, making proceedings time-barred. en-us Fri, 01 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Jul 2025 15:25:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462636 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal, setting aside confiscation of gold and penalties under Sections 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish gold was of foreign origin or smuggled, noting 99.5% purity versus typical 99.9% for foreign gold and absence of foreign markings. Appellant successfully proved domestic purchase from seller through invoices, which department failed to disprove. Section 123 burden of proof was discharged by appellant. Additionally, show cause notice was issued beyond six-month limitation period without proper extension order service, making proceedings time-barred. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 01 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462636