<?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>2026 (3) TMI 765 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788010</link>
    <description>Section 123 of the Customs Act applies to notified goods like gold once seizure is based on reasonable belief of smuggling, even if the gold bears no foreign markings; the possessor must then discharge the reverse burden with reliable records and explanation. On the facts, discrepancies in accounts, weak customer-level documentation and unexplained excess gold and cash meant the burden was not discharged, so confiscation of the gold and currency was upheld. Penalties under Section 112 were unsustainable because the show cause notice and adjudication were ambiguous as to the specific sub-clause and ingredients invoked; personal penalties could not survive against the legal heir or estate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2026 08:42:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=890751" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 765 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788010</link>
      <description>Section 123 of the Customs Act applies to notified goods like gold once seizure is based on reasonable belief of smuggling, even if the gold bears no foreign markings; the possessor must then discharge the reverse burden with reliable records and explanation. On the facts, discrepancies in accounts, weak customer-level documentation and unexplained excess gold and cash meant the burden was not discharged, so confiscation of the gold and currency was upheld. Penalties under Section 112 were unsustainable because the show cause notice and adjudication were ambiguous as to the specific sub-clause and ingredients invoked; personal penalties could not survive against the legal heir or estate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788010</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>