TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1961 (11) TMI 60
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellants, under Art. 226 of the constitution was summarily dismissed. The point raised for our consideration relates to the legality of an order of confiscation, by the Customs Authorities, of certain gold belonging to the appellants on the ground of its being smuggled. The appellants are the partners of a Joint Hindu Family firm carrying on business in Bombay in inter alia gold and jewellery. On September 14, 1954, the appellantfirm had despatched to the Bombay Bullion Refinery for the purpose of melting about 500 tolas of gold. Certain Customs Officers received information that some quantity of gold which was believed to be smuggled was being sent to the refinery for melting and in pursuance of this information they went to the refinery ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s provisions. For the reason that s. 178 (A) was in force at the stage of the appeals from the order of the Collector of Customs to the Central Board of Revenue and the Central Government and possibly under the impression that their case had been decided by throwing on them the burden of proving that the gold was not smuggled, the appellants raised in their Writ Petition to the Punjab High Court points regarding the construction and constitutionality of s. 178 (A). When their Petition as summarily dismissed these points were repeated in the petition for special leave to appeal filed in this Court, and special leave appears to have been granted mainly for the reason that the appeal invoved the question of the constitutionality of s. 178 (A) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of adjudication was of foreign origin, and (2) that gold had been imported in contravention of the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act. Mr. Viswanatha Sastri-learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that though the several facts mentioned by the Collector in paragraph 5 of his order which form the basis of the finding recorded in paragraph 6 might show that the gold was of foreign origin, there was no evidence before the Collector that this foreign gold had been imported after restrictions had been imposed in March 1947 by notification under the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act, a fact the onus to prove which was also on the department, and that in the absence of any material supporting that conclusion the finding that the gold was smuggle....