Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

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 / RSS

Gold, silver confiscation set aside as Revenue fails burden under Customs Act Sections 111 and 123; suspicion insufficient

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CESTAT dismissed the Revenue's appeals and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' order setting aside confiscation of foreign-marked gold, silver bullion and currency under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held that the noticees had produced purchase invoices, accounted entries, and a Chartered Accountant's certification evidencing lawful procurement and tax-paid nature of the gold and silver. Revenue failed to discharge the burden under Section 123 or to rebut the documentary and accounting evidence with any cogent material, relying instead on suspicion and past conduct of co-accused. CESTAT held that mere suspicion cannot replace proof and found no basis to treat the seized currency as sale proceeds of smuggled bullion.....