https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50940 Confiscation of the seized sarees and the personal penalty were found unsustainable where the ownership claim was rejected only because it was made after a few days and the cash memos could not be independently verified. Delay in asserting ownership, by itself, was not treated as proof that the goods were intended for illegal export. The Revenue's enquiries also did not produce adverse material disproving the appellant's purchase of the sarees, and the absence of a duplicate cash memo was not treated as conclusive against him. On that basis, the confiscation and penalty failed. en-us Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Sep 2010 16:51:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50940 Confiscation of the seized sarees and the personal penalty were found unsustainable where the ownership claim was rejected only because it was made after a few days and the cash memos could not be independently verified. Delay in asserting ownership, by itself, was not treated as proof that the goods were intended for illegal export. The Revenue's enquiries also did not produce adverse material disproving the appellant's purchase of the sarees, and the absence of a duplicate cash memo was not treated as conclusive against him. On that basis, the confiscation and penalty failed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50940