Burden of proving smuggled import for non-notified goods; suspicion and visual resemblance cannot sustain confiscation of the bulk consignment.

In confiscation proceedings for non-notified goods, the department must prove smuggled import by reliable evidence; mere suspicion, visual resemblance, or an unserved report is insufficient, and the burden does not shift to the claimant. On the facts, most seized items bore no foreign markings and the material only suggested resemblance to railway-engine parts, so confiscation of the bulk goods was not justified. The Pakistani 5 paisa coins stood apart because they were specifically identified as foreign-origin goods, so their confiscation was sustained.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the department discharged the burden of proving that the seized goods, other than the Pakistani coins, were smuggled and therefore liable to confiscation under the Customs Act; (ii) Whether the confiscation of the Pakistani 5 paisa coins was sustainable.

Issue (i): Whether the department discharged the burden of proving that the seized goods, other than the Pakistani coins, were smuggled and therefore liable to confiscation under the Customs Act.

Analysis: The goods were not notified goods, so the burden remained on the department to establish smuggled character. The joint inspection report showed that most of the seized items had no foreign markings, and only a few small pieces bore markings such as Pakistan, Germany and London. The report also spoke only of resemblance to railway-engine parts, not a definite finding that they were such parts. Reliance on visual examination, an unserved investigation report, and surrounding suspicion was insufficient to prove clandestine import from Bangladesh. Suspicion, however strong, could not replace proof.

Conclusion: The department did not prove that the bulk of the seized goods were smuggled, and confiscation of those goods was not justified.

Issue (ii): Whether the confiscation of the Pakistani 5 paisa coins was sustainable.

Analysis: The joint inspection specifically identified Pakistani 5 paisa coins among the seized articles. Unlike the other goods, these coins carried clear foreign origin indicators and stood on a different footing from the remaining scrap goods.

Conclusion: Confiscation of the Pakistani 5 paisa coins was sustained.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded to the extent that confiscation was set aside for the seized goods other than the Pakistani coins, while confiscation of the Pakistani 5 paisa coins was maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: In confiscation proceedings for non-notified goods, the department must prove smuggled import by reliable evidence; mere suspicion, visual resemblance, or partial foreign markings on some items is insufficient to sustain confiscation of the entire seized consignment.

---