https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118795 The judgment ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the confiscation of the raw silk yarn by Customs. The court held that the burden of proof to establish smuggling rested on the Revenue, which failed to provide sufficient evidence. Despite discrepancies in documents and mis-declaration of goods, the appellant's submission of legal acquisition documents countered the Revenue's arguments. The court emphasized that such discrepancies did not conclusively prove smuggling, leading to the appeal being allowed with consequential benefits for the appellant. en-us Thu, 25 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jul 2012 17:30:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118795 The judgment ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the confiscation of the raw silk yarn by Customs. The court held that the burden of proof to establish smuggling rested on the Revenue, which failed to provide sufficient evidence. Despite discrepancies in documents and mis-declaration of goods, the appellant's submission of legal acquisition documents countered the Revenue's arguments. The court emphasized that such discrepancies did not conclusively prove smuggling, leading to the appeal being allowed with consequential benefits for the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 25 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118795