https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791679 Confiscation proceedings over seized gold prima facie conflicted with the trial court's direction releasing the seized articles, so leave was granted to challenge that limited part of the order. The challenge to acquittal was refused because the prosecution evidence had been closed at the prosecution's request and the sole witness did not support the recovery and seizure case. The proceeding was therefore confined to examination of the release order, while the acquittal remained undisturbed at the leave stage. en-us Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 May 2026 09:15:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791679 Confiscation proceedings over seized gold prima facie conflicted with the trial court's direction releasing the seized articles, so leave was granted to challenge that limited part of the order. The challenge to acquittal was refused because the prosecution evidence had been closed at the prosecution's request and the sole witness did not support the recovery and seizure case. The proceeding was therefore confined to examination of the release order, while the acquittal remained undisturbed at the leave stage. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791679