https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391753 The appellant successfully appealed against the order demanding customs duty, redemption fine, and penalty for the alleged possession of smuggled goods. The Revenue failed to prove the alleged smuggling as the items were not notified under the Customs Act, 1962. The burden of proof was on the Revenue, but they could not establish the goods were smuggled. As a result, the appellant was not liable to pay duty, and the goods were not subject to confiscation. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. en-us Fri, 13 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Nov 2020 16:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391753 The appellant successfully appealed against the order demanding customs duty, redemption fine, and penalty for the alleged possession of smuggled goods. The Revenue failed to prove the alleged smuggling as the items were not notified under the Customs Act, 1962. The burden of proof was on the Revenue, but they could not establish the goods were smuggled. As a result, the appellant was not liable to pay duty, and the goods were not subject to confiscation. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 13 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391753