2015 (1) TMI 1125

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llant, were illegally imported or “smuggled”. More so, when there was no dispute that the petitioner was carrying on the business of jewellers. Appellant was able to adduce some evidence regarding the legal source of the goods under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1961 under which the petitioner had the burden of proof, since gold items were seized. But unfortunately the Revenue has not been able .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ons for this. 4. Mr. Bandopadhyay, learned advocate for the petitioner points out that at that point of time import of gold was free. There is no contradiction of the statement. When the situation is that importation of gold was free, a higher onus was on the Revenue to prove that the gold bars, which were seized from the possession of the appellant, were illegally imported or smuggled . More .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ants. The impugned orders do not call for any interference. The appeal filed by the appellant is accordingly rejected. 7. If a person has to be inflicted an order of confiscation of 11 gold biscuits weighing about 1283.650 gm., more substantial proof was required before confiscation of the goods. On the other hand, the evidence which the appellant produced in the shape of purchase bills, stock .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X