HARENDRA PRASAD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, PATNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are as under : -

(2.) SHRI B.N. Chattopadhyay, ld. Consultant, has appeared on behalf of the appellant. He submits that the entire case of the Revenue is based upon the statement of Shri Ram Lochan Sah which was not a voluntary and correct statement and was retracted by him subsequently. He submits that before confiscating the silver as smuggled goods, the Revenue has to prove that the silver was of foreign origin. There are no markings on the said silver and purity is also not of 99.999.There is no evidence that the silver is of foreign origin and as such the onus placed upon the appellant in terms of Section 123 of the Customs Act to show the legal acquisition of the silver is mis -placed. In support of the above contention, he relies on a number of decision of the Tribunal.

(3.) I have heard Shri A.K. Chattopadhyay, ld. JDR, for the Revenue.