https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189181 Possession of seized wrist watches and watch straps was not proved where the independent panch witnesses were accepted over the police version and the panchanama did not support the alleged chase and interception. Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 was held inapplicable because the articles were first seized by the police as suspected stolen goods and only later handed to customs, so the statutory presumption of smuggling did not arise. Smuggling was also not proved on the evidence, as foreign markings, quantity, import restrictions, and trade statistics did not conclusively establish illicit import. Knowledge that the goods were smuggled was not proved against any accused, and the acquittal was upheld. en-us Tue, 12 Jun 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Dec 2016 15:04:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189181 Possession of seized wrist watches and watch straps was not proved where the independent panch witnesses were accepted over the police version and the panchanama did not support the alleged chase and interception. Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 was held inapplicable because the articles were first seized by the police as suspected stolen goods and only later handed to customs, so the statutory presumption of smuggling did not arise. Smuggling was also not proved on the evidence, as foreign markings, quantity, import restrictions, and trade statistics did not conclusively establish illicit import. Knowledge that the goods were smuggled was not proved against any accused, and the acquittal was upheld. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 12 Jun 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189181