Smuggling - It is true that Section 54 of the Act raises a ...

Section 54 Shifts Burden to Accused for Possession, Requires Proven Recovery First; Doubts Favor Accused and Co-accused.

October 17, 2022

Case Laws Indian Laws SC

Smuggling - It is true that Section 54 of the Act raises a presumption and the burden shifts on the accused to explain as to how he came into possession of the contraband. But to raise the presumption under Section 54 of the Act, it must first be established that a recovery was made from the accused. The moment a doubt is cast upon the most fundamental aspect, namely the search and seizure, the appellant will also be entitled to the same benefit as given by the Special Court to the co-accused. - SC

View Source

← Previous Next →

Smuggling - It is true that Section 54 of the Act raises a ...

Section 54 Shifts Burden to Accused for Possession, Requires Proven Recovery First; Doubts Favor Accused and Co-accused.

October 17, 2022

Case Laws Indian Laws SC

You may also like:

Seizure - Burden of proof - ‘reasonable belief’ - Onus for proving the goods to be not smuggled - Seizure outside the ‘customs area’ - The Tribunal noted that the burden...

The Appellate Tribunal allowed the assessee's claim for tax exemption under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, despite initially claiming under section 54F. The dispute...

Smuggled goods - Burden of proof - Revenue cannot first show laxity in investigation and then seek to shift the burden to prove that the goods are not smuggled - AT

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...

Dishonor of Cheque - standard of proof for rebuttal presumption - The accused has discharged the burden under Section 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instrument Act...

Dishonour of Cheque - in view of the evidence adduced on behalf of the complainant to prove the complaint case, the burden of proof which was shifted upon the accused to...

Dishonor of cheque - presumption that cheque was issued in discharge of legal liability, burden on accused to prove contrary. Supreme Court observations: While deciding...

Smuggling - Betel Nuts - foreign origin goods - town seizure - notified item or not - onus to prove - The CESTAT recognized that betel nuts were not notified items under...

Addition u/s 68 - genuineness and credit worthiness - It is evident that the assessee though has disclosed the source of the deposit but could not establish the nature...

Claim of second sale exemption and the imposition of penalty u/s 12(5)(iii). The High Court held that when the burden was on the dealer to prove the factum of second...

Import of foods of Malaysian origin - Benefit of Exemption under Preferential Trade Agreement - failure to prove the condition of qualifying value content of the goods...

Deduction u/s 54 - LTCG invested in buying two residential units - the assessee would only entitle to the benefit of section 54, 1) if the assessee invested the LTCG...

The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving a claim for deduction u/s 54 for LTCG. The claim was initially denied as the new asset was not purchased or...

Dishonor of Cheque - acquittal of the accused - rebuttal of presumption - Even though the accused is required to probabalise his defence to rebut the presumptions, he...

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...

Quick Updates: