Burden of proving lawful import for non-notified goods fails when purchase bills are fake, restoring confiscation.

For non-notified goods, the Revenue must first establish smuggled origin, but where the possessor relies on purchase bills to prove lawful import and those bills are found to be fake, the explanation for possession fails and the burden cannot remain on the Revenue alone. On those facts, confiscation was properly restored and the order setting it aside was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether confiscation of non-notified goods could be set aside when the respondent produced purchase bills later found to be fake, and whether the burden of proving lawful import shifted on those facts.

Analysis: For non-notified goods, the initial burden lies on the Revenue to establish that the goods are of smuggled origin. However, where the person in possession relies on purchase bills to show legal import or lawful acquisition, and those bills are found to be fake, the burden of proving lawful importation does not remain on the Revenue alone. In such circumstances, the explanation offered for possession of the goods fails, and the order setting aside confiscation cannot be sustained.

Conclusion: The confiscation was rightly restored and the order setting aside confiscation was unsustainable.

---