Burden of proof in customs confiscation requires reliable evidence of foreign origin and smuggled character, not mere suspicion.

For non-notified goods under the Customs Act, confiscation cannot be sustained on mere suspicion, seizure inventory entries, or alleged foreign markings alone. The authorities must first establish foreign origin and smuggled character through reliable evidence, such as proper investigation, trade opinion, or other concrete material; only then can the burden be shifted to the person concerned. Where the record does not show the country of origin and physical examination is unavailable, unsupported assumptions are insufficient to invoke confiscation powers. The practical effect is that confiscation fails unless the evidentiary basis for smuggled foreign origin is proved before burden-shifting is attempted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seized goods were proved to be of foreign origin and smuggled so as to justify confiscation, and whether the burden of proof could be shifted to the respondent in the absence of notification under the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The goods were not available for physical examination, and the conclusion that they were of foreign origin rested only on the seizure inventory and alleged foreign markings. The record did not disclose the country of origin, nor was there any satisfactory investigation, trade opinion, or other concrete evidence to establish smuggled nature beyond suspicion. In the case of non-notified goods, the burden could not be displaced merely because the goods bore certain labels or were found in a passenger bus. The invocation of confiscation provisions required proof of foreign origin and contravention, which was absent on the facts found.

Conclusion: The goods were not proved to be foreign-origin smuggled goods, and the confiscation could not be sustained; the appeal failed.

Final Conclusion: The order setting aside confiscation was upheld, and the Revenue's challenge was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: In respect of non-notified goods, confiscation cannot rest on mere suspicion or foreign markings alone; the authorities must establish foreign origin and smuggled character by reliable evidence before the burden can be shifted.

---