https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105290 In prosecutions under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, seized documents and the accused's statement were accepted as reliable material under the statutory presumption for documents found in custody. The Court held that the special reverse-burden provisions placed on the accused the obligation to disprove the required mental state and lack of permission, and that the trial court erred by applying general Evidence Act principles instead of the statute's own burden framework. The later reply and plea for leniency did not displace the earlier admissions. On that basis, the contraventions under section 9(1)(a), section 9(1)(c) and section 9(1)(d) were established and the acquittal was set aside. en-us Tue, 23 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Mar 2012 11:22:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105290 In prosecutions under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, seized documents and the accused's statement were accepted as reliable material under the statutory presumption for documents found in custody. The Court held that the special reverse-burden provisions placed on the accused the obligation to disprove the required mental state and lack of permission, and that the trial court erred by applying general Evidence Act principles instead of the statute's own burden framework. The later reply and plea for leniency did not displace the earlier admissions. On that basis, the contraventions under section 9(1)(a), section 9(1)(c) and section 9(1)(d) were established and the acquittal was set aside. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 23 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105290