https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84085 Confiscation and penalty for a movie camera were held unsustainable because the camera was not a notified item under Section 123 of the Customs Act and the Department failed to prove its smuggled character. In the absence of evidence of the actual import date or any prohibited sale period, the burden did not shift to the importer to prove lawful import. The Collector (Appeals) order was left undisturbed, and the Revenue's challenge failed. The governing principle is that, where goods are not notified, the Department must first establish smuggled nature before confiscation or penalty can be sustained. en-us Mon, 23 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jul 2011 16:48:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84085 Confiscation and penalty for a movie camera were held unsustainable because the camera was not a notified item under Section 123 of the Customs Act and the Department failed to prove its smuggled character. In the absence of evidence of the actual import date or any prohibited sale period, the burden did not shift to the importer to prove lawful import. The Collector (Appeals) order was left undisturbed, and the Revenue's challenge failed. The governing principle is that, where goods are not notified, the Department must first establish smuggled nature before confiscation or penalty can be sustained. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 23 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84085