Smuggling - gold bullion of foreign origin - notified goods or ...

Appellants Prove Lawful Gold Possession u/s 123 of Customs Act; Appeal Allowed Due to Lack of Evidence.

December 24, 2021

Case Laws Customs AT

Smuggling - gold bullion of foreign origin - notified goods or not - burden to prove - The appellants have sufficiently discharged their burden of proof in terms of Section 123 of Custom Act by proving the licit possession of the impugned gold which was delivered for job work through approved mode of the Trade for transfer of Gold and Jewellery - the department has failed to show any cogent reason to believe that the goods were the smuggled one. - The Order-in-Appeal is nothing but the outcome of presumption on part of the authority - Appeal allowed- AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Smuggling - gold bullion of foreign origin - notified goods or ...

Appellants Prove Lawful Gold Possession u/s 123 of Customs Act; Appeal Allowed Due to Lack of Evidence.

December 24, 2021

Case Laws Customs AT

You may also like:

Smuggling - foreign origin Gold - burden to prove - The tribunal clarified that the burden of proof under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962, solely rested on the...

Appellant proved ownership of gold bars through valid invoices, discharging initial onus. Revenue failed to establish invoices unrelated to seized gold, lacking inquiry...

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...

CESTAT allowed the appeal against confiscation of 449.300 gms of fine gold and penalties imposed on the appellants. It held that the department failed to produce any...

Confiscation of the gold bars - remelted gold of foreign origin or not - The admissibility and weight of retracted statements - The Tribunal found that the appellants...

Smuggling - Seized 2332.800 gm of foreign marked gold - confiscation - Burden of proof - The Tribunal held that the appellant’s have satisfactorily discharged the burden...

Appellant financed an individual for smuggling gold from Dubai and selling it in India. Penalty was imposed u/s 112(b)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner held...

Customs Officers seized gold bars believing they were liable for confiscation under reasonable belief of smuggling. However, the gold was covered under proper documents,...

Smuggling - Gold - absolute confiscation - onus to prove - The Tribunal noted that the gold seizure occurred during a town seizure, and the gold lacked foreign markings....

Confiscation of smuggled gold bars/biscuits u/ss 111(b), 111(d), and 111(f) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants failed to establish the licit procurement of the...

Confiscation - Smuggling - Gold Bullion - Gold Jewellery - The appellant has not adduced any evidence to indicate that the same were procured locally. Appellants who...

Confiscation of Gold - gold with foreign marks - illicit nature of the gold - onus to prove - burden u/s 123 (1) was on the appellant to prove that the goods were either...

Confiscation - Smuggling of Betel Nuts - discharge of burden to prove u/s 123 of Customs Act - The betel nut is not notified under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962...

The CESTAT allowed the appeal against confiscation of gold, holding that the seizure by customs officials lacked reasonable belief of the goods being smuggled as...

Smuggling - Gold - It is true that the conduct of the appellants was suspicious - But, the Officers did not have a reasonable belief in the first place to assert that...

Quick Updates: