Just a moment...

⚠✕
❮ Top
☎ Help
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Keyword Search :
AI Tools : New
Ask tax questions in natural language. Powered by AI trained on the TaxTMI legal database. Use AI Tools ➞
Call Us / Help / Feedback✕

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS
PrevPreviousNextNext

2007 (5) TMI 499

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....JDR,  for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. The Ld. Advocate for the appellants states that the seizure in this case was made nowhere near the border. The purity of the gold was 995 and not 999 and there was no foreign marking on the impugned gold and hence seizure itself was illegal. He also states that the version of the Department that the gold was recovered fro....

PrevPreviousNextNext