https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74279 The judgment focused on the confiscation of goods under the Customs Act, 1962, and the imposition of penalties under various sections of the Act. The competency of the Additional Collector to pass the order, allegations of coercion in obtaining statements, and denial of natural justice through lack of cross-examination were key issues. The court considered the burden of proof for legally acquired goods and the importance of expert opinions. Ultimately, the penalties imposed under Section 119 were set aside, leading to the judgment setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeals with consequential relief. en-us Mon, 31 Oct 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74279 The judgment focused on the confiscation of goods under the Customs Act, 1962, and the imposition of penalties under various sections of the Act. The competency of the Additional Collector to pass the order, allegations of coercion in obtaining statements, and denial of natural justice through lack of cross-examination were key issues. The court considered the burden of proof for legally acquired goods and the importance of expert opinions. Ultimately, the penalties imposed under Section 119 were set aside, leading to the judgment setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeals with consequential relief. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 31 Oct 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74279