TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (12) TMI 386
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder]. - In October, 1991 the officers of the Customs Department seized from the possession of the appellant tools of various kinds such as drills, screw-drivers, saw blades etc. on the belief that the goods have been smuggled into India. The appellant could not produce evidence of importation of the goods, or legal acquisition by him. He said that the goods had been sold to him by third ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtment has not been discharged. The fact that the appellant could not produce before the Department D.P. Khandelwal, who, he said, had supplied the goods, does not mean that the nature of the goods as having been smuggled has been established. Decisions of the Tribunal are cited in support. 3. The Departmental Representative contends that by the fact of the appellant having undertaken to p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of proving that the goods were smuggled lie on the Department. In the judgment of the Supreme Court cited by the Departmental Representative, the Supreme Court confirmed the finding of the Calcutta High Court that the burden of proving that the wrist watches which were seized from Kanungo and Company were lawfully imported and shifted to it after the Customs Department informed it of the result o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ers of the Additional Collector and the Collector (Appeals) it appears that what the appellant said was that the goods were supplied to him in his capacity as a commission agent by D.P. Khandelwal and others. It would not be correct to say that the appellant undertook to prove that the goods were legally imported, when he said that he would produce Khandelwal. If the Department's plea had to be ac....