https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45634 The prosecution had to prove that the seized pellets were the same articles examined by the Mint and that they were gold of foreign origin before the presumption under section 123 of the Customs Act could apply. That link was not established: the sample seals were not sent, no Mint witness proved receipt of the samples in the same condition, and the prosecution failed to show that the assayed pieces were the very pieces seized from the accused. The assay certificate was also treated as inadmissible because the maker was not examined. On these facts, the prosecution failed to prove the nature of the seized articles, so the conviction and sentence could not be sustained and acquittal followed. en-us Mon, 22 Jan 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 09:57:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45634 The prosecution had to prove that the seized pellets were the same articles examined by the Mint and that they were gold of foreign origin before the presumption under section 123 of the Customs Act could apply. That link was not established: the sample seals were not sent, no Mint witness proved receipt of the samples in the same condition, and the prosecution failed to show that the assayed pieces were the very pieces seized from the accused. The assay certificate was also treated as inadmissible because the maker was not examined. On these facts, the prosecution failed to prove the nature of the seized articles, so the conviction and sentence could not be sustained and acquittal followed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 22 Jan 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45634