COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, MADRAS AND ORS vs D. BHOORMUL

The Supreme Court held that under Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act, the burden of proof regarding the smuggled nature of goods lies on the alleged owner, particularly when facts are within their special knowledge as per Section 106 of the Evidence Act. The Court found that the respondent's failure to satisfactorily explain the ownership and source of the goods justified the Collector's order for confiscation. The Division Bench of the High Court's ruling that the Customs Department did not discharge its burden of proof was overturned, affirming the legality of the confiscation order.