Topic
CESTAT Kolkata set aside the gold confiscation, ruling that concealment and missing documents alone do not prove smuggling without foreign origin proof. This clarifies the customs burden under Section 111(b) of the Customs Act 1962, impacting traders.
Customs officials must possess a reasonable belief before seizing goods, and the onus under Sec 123 cannot be shifted to the accused without proper justification. This ruling curtails arbitrary confiscation of gold and safeguards importers from unjust seizure.
CESTAT Kolkata ruled that secretly smuggling gold via internal body concealment, without any documentation, constitutes conclusive evidence of smuggling intent under Sections 111(d) and (i) of the Customs Act 1962, triggering automatic confiscation and penalty. This sets a critical precedent for airport customs enforcement, shifting the burden to travelers to explain clandestine transport of high-value goods.
The Customs Appellate Tribunal holds that where gold lacks foreign marking and the accused is not the possessor or owner, the burden under Section 123 shifts to the Revenue.