https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84826 Foreign-origin ball bearings were treated as smuggled goods where the seizure, the possessor's statement, and the appellant's section 108 admission were mutually corroborative. A bare retraction without particulars of coercion or threat did not displace the confession, and the failure to produce vouchers, bills, or the supplier's identity justified adverse inference from facts within the appellant's special knowledge. The initial burden of proving illicit character was therefore discharged and confiscation was justified. However, because the goods were not prohibited and could be imported under REP licence, absolute confiscation was unwarranted; redemption on payment of fine was permissible and the personal penalty was sustained. en-us Tue, 01 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Jul 2011 18:27:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84826 Foreign-origin ball bearings were treated as smuggled goods where the seizure, the possessor's statement, and the appellant's section 108 admission were mutually corroborative. A bare retraction without particulars of coercion or threat did not displace the confession, and the failure to produce vouchers, bills, or the supplier's identity justified adverse inference from facts within the appellant's special knowledge. The initial burden of proving illicit character was therefore discharged and confiscation was justified. However, because the goods were not prohibited and could be imported under REP licence, absolute confiscation was unwarranted; redemption on payment of fine was permissible and the personal penalty was sustained. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 01 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84826