Burden of proof on non-notified goods failed when the record did not support lawful import documents; Tribunal's finding was set aside.

The Tribunal could not sustain its finding on the non-notified goods without examining the evidentiary record, because the record before the adjudicating authority did not show production of documents evidencing lawful import or lawful acquisition. The Department's challenge therefore succeeded to that extent and the Tribunal's order was interfered with for the non-notified goods. The notified goods had already been remanded for de novo consideration, so no substantive issue survived on that aspect.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal could sustain its finding on the non-notified goods without examining the evidentiary record, and whether the Department had discharged the burden of proof regarding such goods.

Analysis: The notified goods stood remanded for de novo consideration, so no substantive issue survived in that respect. As regards the non-notified goods, the Tribunal proceeded on the footing that the respondents had produced documents showing lawful import or lawful acquisition. The record before the adjudicating authority did not show production of such documents, and the Tribunal's conclusion was therefore inconsistent with the facts on record.

Conclusion: The challenge succeeded in relation to the non-notified goods, and the Tribunal's order was interfered with to that extent.

---