Lawful purchase evidence controls confiscation of seized fabrics; absence of duty-paid documents sustained fine and personal penalty.

Processed man-made fabrics were confiscated because the appellants could not produce any duty-paid invoice, bill, or other reliable evidence showing lawful purchase from the open market. The record, including the post-seizure inquiry, supported the finding that the consignments had been cleared without payment of duty and moved under fictitious names without complete addresses. In the absence of cogent and convincing proof of lawful acquisition, the Commissioner's findings were not disturbed, and the confiscation, fine, and personal penalty were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the confiscation of the seized processed man-made fabrics and the imposition of fine and personal penalty on the appellants were justified in the absence of satisfactory evidence of lawful purchase and duty payment.

Analysis: The appellants failed to produce any duty-paid invoice, bill, or other reliable document to show that the goods were purchased from the open market at Surat. The record, including the inquiry conducted after seizure, supported the conclusion that the consignments had been cleared without payment of duty and were routed under fictitious names without complete addresses. In the absence of cogent and convincing evidence to substantiate lawful purchase, the findings of the Commissioner were not disturbed.

Conclusion: The confiscation of the goods and the imposition of fine and personal penalty were upheld.

---