https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108420 For non-notified goods, the Revenue had to prove that the raw silk yarn was smuggled before confiscation under the Customs Act, 1962 or imposition of penalty could be sustained. The record contained no satisfactory evidence of smuggling, and the appellant's statement did not establish that the sellers had imported or smuggled the goods. As the adjudicating authority had not properly dealt with the relevant evidence, the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt. Confiscation and penalty were therefore set aside, and consequential relief followed. en-us Tue, 05 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Mar 2012 13:58:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108420 For non-notified goods, the Revenue had to prove that the raw silk yarn was smuggled before confiscation under the Customs Act, 1962 or imposition of penalty could be sustained. The record contained no satisfactory evidence of smuggling, and the appellant's statement did not establish that the sellers had imported or smuggled the goods. As the adjudicating authority had not properly dealt with the relevant evidence, the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt. Confiscation and penalty were therefore set aside, and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 05 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108420