Burden of Proof Lies with Claimant for Seized Goods; Appellants Prove Lawful Purchase of Gold with Documentation.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Smuggling - foreign origin Gold - burden to prove - The tribunal clarified that the burden of proof under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962, solely rested on the person claiming ownership of the seized goods, in this case, the appellant who claimed to have purchased the gold legally. It was deemed that the appellants had discharged their burden by providing substantial documentary evidence supporting their claim of lawful acquisition from Snehal Gems Pvt Ltd. - The tribunal found that the Department failed to disprove the appellants' claim of legal purchase or to conclusively prove that the goods were procured through illegal means.....