https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122692 In customs smuggling cases, once seizure and reasonable belief are established, the burden shifts to the person concerned to prove lawful import and rebut the allegation of smuggling. Here, the seized goods were not shown to be of Indian origin or lawfully imported, and the confessional statement was treated as reliable despite the plea of retraction. The failure to produce material on origin or import justified confiscation and penalty, and the appellant's conduct was also found contrary to Notification No. 9/96-CUS. dated 22-1-1996. en-us Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:35:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122692 In customs smuggling cases, once seizure and reasonable belief are established, the burden shifts to the person concerned to prove lawful import and rebut the allegation of smuggling. Here, the seized goods were not shown to be of Indian origin or lawfully imported, and the confessional statement was treated as reliable despite the plea of retraction. The failure to produce material on origin or import justified confiscation and penalty, and the appellant's conduct was also found contrary to Notification No. 9/96-CUS. dated 22-1-1996. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122692