https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90563 Section 178A of the Sea Customs Act was treated as a valid evidentiary rule shifting the burden in smuggling cases, because it was a reasonable restriction aimed at effective enforcement and did not violate the rights to hold property or carry on trade. The Court further held that Section 23A of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act created a continuing statutory reference, so Section 178A applied to confiscation proceedings for contravention of a Section 8(1) notification. On the facts, the surrounding circumstances, including the quantity of gold, absence of purchase vouchers, and a suspicious letter, were sufficient to establish reasonable belief that the goods were smuggled, so the confiscation proceedings were upheld. en-us Mon, 25 Sep 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Aug 2014 10:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90563 Section 178A of the Sea Customs Act was treated as a valid evidentiary rule shifting the burden in smuggling cases, because it was a reasonable restriction aimed at effective enforcement and did not violate the rights to hold property or carry on trade. The Court further held that Section 23A of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act created a continuing statutory reference, so Section 178A applied to confiscation proceedings for contravention of a Section 8(1) notification. On the facts, the surrounding circumstances, including the quantity of gold, absence of purchase vouchers, and a suspicious letter, were sufficient to establish reasonable belief that the goods were smuggled, so the confiscation proceedings were upheld. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 25 Sep 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90563