https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46057 Section 178A of the Sea Customs Act operates as a burden-shifting rule of evidence only when clearly invoked in the inquiry; on the material described, it was not invoked and the burden remained on Customs. The commentary also notes that confiscation for smuggled gold requires evidence fixing the date of importation and showing import contrary to a prohibition or restriction in force. Mere suspicion, a chit, an assay report, or unexplained conduct was insufficient to establish smuggling or a person's involvement in importation. On that reasoning, the confiscation order, personal penalty, and seizure could not be sustained, and return of the gold was directed. en-us Fri, 19 Feb 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:32:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46057 Section 178A of the Sea Customs Act operates as a burden-shifting rule of evidence only when clearly invoked in the inquiry; on the material described, it was not invoked and the burden remained on Customs. The commentary also notes that confiscation for smuggled gold requires evidence fixing the date of importation and showing import contrary to a prohibition or restriction in force. Mere suspicion, a chit, an assay report, or unexplained conduct was insufficient to establish smuggling or a person's involvement in importation. On that reasoning, the confiscation order, personal penalty, and seizure could not be sustained, and return of the gold was directed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 19 Feb 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46057