https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91516 Confiscation of the zip fasteners was sustained because the purchase bills relied on to prove lawful acquisition were dated after seizure, and there was no contemporaneous evidence that the goods were covered by valid documentation at the relevant time. The explanation that the bills were prepared later when approval transactions were finalised was rejected. The penalty was nevertheless set aside because the quantity involved and the absence of material showing habitual dealing in smuggled goods justified extending the benefit of doubt on the penal aspect. Confiscation therefore remained in force, but the monetary penalty did not survive. en-us Fri, 13 Sep 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:36:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91516 Confiscation of the zip fasteners was sustained because the purchase bills relied on to prove lawful acquisition were dated after seizure, and there was no contemporaneous evidence that the goods were covered by valid documentation at the relevant time. The explanation that the bills were prepared later when approval transactions were finalised was rejected. The penalty was nevertheless set aside because the quantity involved and the absence of material showing habitual dealing in smuggled goods justified extending the benefit of doubt on the penal aspect. Confiscation therefore remained in force, but the monetary penalty did not survive. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 13 Sep 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91516