https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198733 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, vacating the confiscation order and penalties imposed. The burden of proving the seized goods were not smuggled was on the Customs authorities, who failed to provide evidence for confiscation under Section 111 or penalties under Section 112. The appellant was relieved from proving the goods were not smuggled as mobile phone batteries were not notified under Section 123, shifting the burden to the Customs authorities. The judgment was pronounced on 6-1-2017. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Feb 2018 07:42:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198733 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, vacating the confiscation order and penalties imposed. The burden of proving the seized goods were not smuggled was on the Customs authorities, who failed to provide evidence for confiscation under Section 111 or penalties under Section 112. The appellant was relieved from proving the goods were not smuggled as mobile phone batteries were not notified under Section 123, shifting the burden to the Customs authorities. The judgment was pronounced on 6-1-2017. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198733