https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52113 The appeal was allowed as the burden to prove the smuggled nature of seized goods of foreign origin under Section 111 of the Customs Act was not discharged by the Department. The goods, found at the appellants' premises, were not proven to be smuggled as they were available in the open market and not notified goods at the relevant time. The mere absence of a bill did not establish smuggling. As the Department failed to meet its burden, the confiscation and penalty were deemed unjustified, leading to the appeal's success and setting aside of the impugned order. en-us Thu, 28 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Oct 2010 13:13:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52113 The appeal was allowed as the burden to prove the smuggled nature of seized goods of foreign origin under Section 111 of the Customs Act was not discharged by the Department. The goods, found at the appellants' premises, were not proven to be smuggled as they were available in the open market and not notified goods at the relevant time. The mere absence of a bill did not establish smuggling. As the Department failed to meet its burden, the confiscation and penalty were deemed unjustified, leading to the appeal's success and setting aside of the impugned order. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 28 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52113