https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44597 Possession of foreign cloth in a person's house, coupled with an unexplained and rejected claim of ignorance, was treated as sufficient to show knowing custody of goods liable to confiscation under the Customs Act. The evidence supported the conclusion that the goods were foreign goods kept without permit or duty payment, attracting confiscation under the customs and import control provisions and satisfying the ingredients of Section 135(1)(b)(i). On those facts, the concurrent findings were not interfered with in revision, and the conviction and sentence were upheld. en-us Thu, 09 Dec 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Jul 2010 11:11:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44597 Possession of foreign cloth in a person's house, coupled with an unexplained and rejected claim of ignorance, was treated as sufficient to show knowing custody of goods liable to confiscation under the Customs Act. The evidence supported the conclusion that the goods were foreign goods kept without permit or duty payment, attracting confiscation under the customs and import control provisions and satisfying the ingredients of Section 135(1)(b)(i). On those facts, the concurrent findings were not interfered with in revision, and the conviction and sentence were upheld. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 09 Dec 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44597