https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45094 Possession of gold bars bearing foreign markings is stated to attract the statutory presumption under Section 123(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the explanation of innocent entrustment was treated as unacceptable on the facts discussed. The commentary further notes that apprehension by police rather than a customs officer does not, by itself, defeat that presumption, with conviction under Section 135 of the Customs Act sustained in favour of Revenue. It also explains that the prosecution may prove seized bars to be gold under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 through reliable assaying evidence, even without a Mint Master's certificate where purity is otherwise established, supporting conviction under Section 85. en-us Fri, 06 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jun 2018 11:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45094 Possession of gold bars bearing foreign markings is stated to attract the statutory presumption under Section 123(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the explanation of innocent entrustment was treated as unacceptable on the facts discussed. The commentary further notes that apprehension by police rather than a customs officer does not, by itself, defeat that presumption, with conviction under Section 135 of the Customs Act sustained in favour of Revenue. It also explains that the prosecution may prove seized bars to be gold under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 through reliable assaying evidence, even without a Mint Master's certificate where purity is otherwise established, supporting conviction under Section 85. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 06 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45094