Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
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

Gold Seizure Case: Court Rules Customs Act Section 123 Inapplicable, Insufficient Evidence Against Appellant.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Seizure of gold and a vehicle by police authorities from the appellant and others. The police handed over the seized goods to customs authorities. The appellant is the brother-in-law of the co-accused, who was coming from Riyadh. The appellant went to receive the co-accused at the airport, being a close relative. There is no confessional statement from the appellant about being aware of the gold. The Bombay High Court has held that goods seized by police and handed over to customs are not "goods seized" u/s 123 of the Customs Act, making it inapplicable in this case. The co-accused stated the appellant was unaware of the foreign marked gold (FMG) in his luggage. The allegation of taking a longer route to evade authorities lacks evidence. Th.........