https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278153 In proceedings concerning seized goods bearing foreign markings, the court held that the Tribunal erred in placing the burden on the revenue to prove foreign origin where the goods were not notified under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962. Applying its earlier ruling on the same issue, the court found the Tribunal's interference with the adjudicating authority and first appellate authority unsustainable in law. The connected questions on confiscation, recovery, and the operation of statutory presumptions were resolved on the same basis, and the confiscation and consequential orders were restored. en-us Wed, 09 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jan 2019 18:25:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278153 In proceedings concerning seized goods bearing foreign markings, the court held that the Tribunal erred in placing the burden on the revenue to prove foreign origin where the goods were not notified under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962. Applying its earlier ruling on the same issue, the court found the Tribunal's interference with the adjudicating authority and first appellate authority unsustainable in law. The connected questions on confiscation, recovery, and the operation of statutory presumptions were resolved on the same basis, and the confiscation and consequential orders were restored. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 09 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278153