https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106303 Where seized goods are treated as owned by the appellant in the adjudication order, the appellate authority cannot reject the appeal on a contrary premise that ownership was denied. The accepted finding on ownership, especially where part of the seized goods was released and no Revenue challenge was made to that finding, required the appeal to be considered on its merits. The substantive issue whether the goods were non-notified items, and therefore whether the burden to prove smuggled character lay on the Revenue, had to be adjudicated afresh. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration of that burden-of-proof question. en-us Thu, 09 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:12:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106303 Where seized goods are treated as owned by the appellant in the adjudication order, the appellate authority cannot reject the appeal on a contrary premise that ownership was denied. The accepted finding on ownership, especially where part of the seized goods was released and no Revenue challenge was made to that finding, required the appeal to be considered on its merits. The substantive issue whether the goods were non-notified items, and therefore whether the burden to prove smuggled character lay on the Revenue, had to be adjudicated afresh. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration of that burden-of-proof question. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 09 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106303