9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Appeal against dropping proceedings under Sections 121, 118, 112 & 115(2) of the Customs Act based on the recovery of Indian currency from a vehicle, confessional statements, lack of corroboration, and insufficient evidence. Analysis: The judgment under review pertains to multiple appeals by the Revenue challenging the dropping of proceedings against the respondents under various sections of the Customs Act. The case originated from the interception of a Maruti Van on the Jaipur-Bikaner Road in 1996, wherein Indian currency amounting to Rs. 2,73,750 was found. The respondents failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the possession of the currency. Subsequent investigations revealed that the money was allegedly the sale proceeds of foreign origin gold biscuits. Show cause notices were issued proposing confiscation of the currency and penalties under the Customs Act. The adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings, a decision upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Upon review, it was noted that the Department heavily relied on a confessional statement made by one of the respondents, admitting to the currency being proceeds from the sale of smuggled gold. However, both lower authorities rejected this statement due to lack of corroboration and subsequent retraction by the respondent. The judgment cited precedent where it was established that mere confessional statements without supporting evidence are insufficient to prove charges. The authorities concluded that the Department failed to establish the currency as proceeds from smuggled goods, leading to the dismissal of the proceedings. The presiding judge concurred with the findings of fact by the lower authorities, emphasizing the absence of substantial evidence linking the currency to smuggled gold. The lack of corroboration from other sources regarding the alleged transactions further weakened the Department's case. The judgment highlighted the necessity of tangible evidence to draw presumptions regarding the origin of seized money. Ultimately, the judgment upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) to dismiss the appeals by the Revenue, citing the insufficiency of evidence and the adherence to legal precedents. In conclusion, the judgment underscores the importance of corroborative evidence in establishing charges under the Customs Act, emphasizing that mere confessional statements are insufficient without additional proof. The decision to dismiss the appeals against dropping proceedings was based on the lack of concrete evidence linking the seized currency to smuggled goods, in alignment with established legal principles and precedents.
|
