Statutory burden for seized gold: inconsistent documents and explanations failed to prove lawful acquisition, so confiscation stood.

Seized gold biscuits were sustained in confiscation as smuggled goods because the claimants failed to prove lawful acquisition and possession under the Customs Act. The record showed no reliable contemporaneous documents, inconsistent invoices and transit papers, contradictions in successive explanations, fabrication of duplicate invoices, absence of matching sale records, and unexplained obliteration of markings on the gold. Applying the statutory presumption in proceedings concerning gold, the burden lay on the claimants to establish licit acquisition, and the evidence did not rebut that burden. The confiscation order and connected findings were therefore upheld and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seized gold biscuits were liable to confiscation as smuggled goods and whether the appellants discharged the burden of proving licit acquisition under the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The seized gold was recovered without any reliable supporting documents and the various invoices and transit papers produced at different stages were found to be inconsistent with each other and with the nature, quantity, form, and movement of the goods. The record showed contradictions in the appellants' explanations, fabrication of duplicate invoices, absence of matching sale records, and unexplained obliteration of markings on the gold. In proceedings relating to gold, the burden under the statutory presumption lay on the claimant to establish lawful possession and acquisition, and the evidence on record did not rebut that burden.

Conclusion: The seized gold was correctly treated as smuggled goods, the confiscation and connected findings were upheld, and the challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeals were dismissed because the appellants failed to prove lawful acquisition or possession of the seized gold and no ground was made out to interfere with the confiscation order.

Ratio Decidendi: Where seized gold is unaccompanied by credible contemporaneous documents and the claimant's successive explanations are mutually inconsistent, the statutory burden to prove lawful acquisition is not discharged and confiscation may be sustained.

---