https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51115 In proceedings relating to non-notified goods, the Revenue had the burden to prove smuggled character by legally admissible evidence before confiscation or personal penalty could stand. Suspicion, delayed ownership claims, and circumstantial movement evidence were held insufficient where the appellants produced documentary material and supporting statements showing lawful possession and purchase. The confiscation and penalties were therefore found unsustainable, and the impugned orders were set aside with consequential relief. en-us Thu, 07 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Sep 2010 17:44:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51115 In proceedings relating to non-notified goods, the Revenue had the burden to prove smuggled character by legally admissible evidence before confiscation or personal penalty could stand. Suspicion, delayed ownership claims, and circumstantial movement evidence were held insufficient where the appellants produced documentary material and supporting statements showing lawful possession and purchase. The confiscation and penalties were therefore found unsustainable, and the impugned orders were set aside with consequential relief. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 07 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51115