Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

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 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

Revenue failed to prove gold was foreign or smuggled; Section 123 reverse onus inapplicable, Section 112(b) confiscation set aside

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CESTAT held that the record fails to establish the foreign origin or smuggled character of seized gold recovered from domestic premises, and the seizure lacked the necessary subjective satisfaction and contemporaneous material to justify a reasonable belief of smuggling. Consequently, Section 123's reverse onus is inapplicable until the Revenue first proves foreign origin; the onus therefore remained on the Department, which it did not discharge. In absence of proof that the gold constituted prohibited imports, confiscation and penalties under Section 112(b) could not be sustained. The Commissioner (Appeals) correctly set aside confiscation and penalties, and the Revenue's appeals were dismissed.....