https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41887 In a customs prosecution involving possession of foreign-origin prohibited goods, once possession and the prohibited character of the goods are established, the burden shifts to the accused to explain lawful possession. The High Court held that the trial court erred in requiring direct proof of the exact manner of smuggling and in ignoring the statutory presumptions arising from import control law and the rule relating to special knowledge under the Evidence Act. As the accused's invoice was found bogus and possession was admitted, the acquittal was unsustainable and was set aside; the accused was held liable to conviction and punishment. en-us Tue, 14 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jun 2010 17:14:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41887 In a customs prosecution involving possession of foreign-origin prohibited goods, once possession and the prohibited character of the goods are established, the burden shifts to the accused to explain lawful possession. The High Court held that the trial court erred in requiring direct proof of the exact manner of smuggling and in ignoring the statutory presumptions arising from import control law and the rule relating to special knowledge under the Evidence Act. As the accused's invoice was found bogus and possession was admitted, the acquittal was unsustainable and was set aside; the accused was held liable to conviction and punishment. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 14 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41887