https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96212 The tribunal upheld the confiscation of the truck and imposition of penalties under the Customs Act, 1962, based on evidence implicating the appellant in smuggling activities. Despite the appellant's arguments regarding ownership and the nature of the goods, the tribunal found the appellant responsible for the illegal importation due to the cleaner's statement. The burden of proof was placed on the appellant, who failed to provide sufficient evidence to refute the allegations, leading to the rejection of the appeal and affirmation of the confiscation and penalties. en-us Mon, 28 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:02:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96212 The tribunal upheld the confiscation of the truck and imposition of penalties under the Customs Act, 1962, based on evidence implicating the appellant in smuggling activities. Despite the appellant's arguments regarding ownership and the nature of the goods, the tribunal found the appellant responsible for the illegal importation due to the cleaner's statement. The burden of proof was placed on the appellant, who failed to provide sufficient evidence to refute the allegations, leading to the rejection of the appeal and affirmation of the confiscation and penalties. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 28 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96212