https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48315 The Court dismissed the petition challenging a notice under SAFEMA based on a prior Customs Act conviction. The delay in proceedings was attributed to a previous stay, and the subsequent notice was deemed a continuation of the first. The Court upheld the authorities' actions, noting the petitioner's failure to prove legal income sources for property acquisition. Emphasizing limited interference under Article 226, the Court upheld the lower authorities' findings and rejected the petition due to insufficient evidence of legitimate property acquisition sources, concluding the legal proceedings without costs. en-us Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Dec 2014 09:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48315 The Court dismissed the petition challenging a notice under SAFEMA based on a prior Customs Act conviction. The delay in proceedings was attributed to a previous stay, and the subsequent notice was deemed a continuation of the first. The Court upheld the authorities' actions, noting the petitioner's failure to prove legal income sources for property acquisition. Emphasizing limited interference under Article 226, the Court upheld the lower authorities' findings and rejected the petition due to insufficient evidence of legitimate property acquisition sources, concluding the legal proceedings without costs. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48315