Reverse burden of proof requires possessor to prove lawful origin of seized gold; confiscation upheld, penalties set aside.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Section 123's reverse evidential burden applies to seized melted or unmarked gold: once officers form a reasonable belief of smuggling, the possessor must prove lawful acquisition, and the adjudicator may examine the reasonableness of that belief and confidential intelligence. Because appellants failed to satisfactorily account for the seized gold and cash-documentary discrepancies, absence of customer records, fabricated post-seizure documents and unexplained forensic stock differences-the Tribunal found confiscation justified on the preponderance of probabilities. However, penalty proceedings under Section 112 were set aside for lack of specific sub clause identification in the show cause notice, and the penalty on a deceased appellant was quashed as personal.....