https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72365 The appeal challenging the confiscation of contraband goods and a vehicle under the Customs Act, 1962, with a reduced penalty, was dismissed. The appellant's denial of ownership was refuted based on statements and circumstances, leading to the upheld penalty and confiscation by adjudicating authorities. Despite arguments of borrowed ownership, subsequent events confirmed the appellant's liability for confiscation due to his awareness of smuggling activities involving the vehicle. The confiscated wristwatch, a notified item, lacked evidence of lawful acquisition, resulting in its confiscation. The reduced penalty of Rs. 1,000 was deemed appropriate given the appellant's involvement in smuggling incidents. en-us Fri, 30 May 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 May 2011 18:02:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72365 The appeal challenging the confiscation of contraband goods and a vehicle under the Customs Act, 1962, with a reduced penalty, was dismissed. The appellant's denial of ownership was refuted based on statements and circumstances, leading to the upheld penalty and confiscation by adjudicating authorities. Despite arguments of borrowed ownership, subsequent events confirmed the appellant's liability for confiscation due to his awareness of smuggling activities involving the vehicle. The confiscated wristwatch, a notified item, lacked evidence of lawful acquisition, resulting in its confiscation. The reduced penalty of Rs. 1,000 was deemed appropriate given the appellant's involvement in smuggling incidents. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 30 May 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72365