https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782345 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal, setting aside confiscation of 20 gold biscuits and penalties under Section 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. It held that the seizure was not based on "reasonable belief" under Section 110(1), as the Department failed to establish the foreign or smuggled nature of the gold. Mere foreign markings and limited purity tests (only 5 of 20 biscuits, with purity below 999.9) were deemed insufficient, particularly for a town seizure away from any border or port. Consequently, the burden of proof under Section 123 did not shift to the appellant. With smuggling not proved, confiscation and penalties were unsustainable. en-us Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2025 15:21:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782345 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal, setting aside confiscation of 20 gold biscuits and penalties under Section 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. It held that the seizure was not based on "reasonable belief" under Section 110(1), as the Department failed to establish the foreign or smuggled nature of the gold. Mere foreign markings and limited purity tests (only 5 of 20 biscuits, with purity below 999.9) were deemed insufficient, particularly for a town seizure away from any border or port. Consequently, the burden of proof under Section 123 did not shift to the appellant. With smuggling not proved, confiscation and penalties were unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782345