Burden of proof: persons in possession of seized goods must prove they are not smuggled; claimants must prove ownership. Where goods are seized in the reasonable belief they are smuggled, the burden of proof that they are not smuggled is on the person from whose possession they were seized; if another person claims ownership, that claimant also bears the burden. In other seizure scenarios, the burden lies on any person who claims to be the owner. The provision applies to gold, manufactures thereof, watches, and other classes of goods as notified by the Central Government.
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Burden of proof: persons in possession of seized goods must prove they are not smuggled; claimants must prove ownership.
Where goods are seized in the reasonable belief they are smuggled, the burden of proof that they are not smuggled is on the person from whose possession they were seized; if another person claims ownership, that claimant also bears the burden. In other seizure scenarios, the burden lies on any person who claims to be the owner. The provision applies to gold, manufactures thereof, watches, and other classes of goods as notified by the Central Government.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.