2005 (7) TMI 430 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of the search and seizure conducted by Customs officers.
2. Validity of the statements and evidence linking the appellant to the seized goods.
3. Appropriateness of the penalties and fines imposed on the appellant.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Legality of the Search and Seizure:
The Customs officers conducted a search on 7th/8th July 1999 at the godown of M/s. Point to Point Transport Quick Daily Parcel Service in Delhi, recovering 303 packages containing various foreign-origin goods valued at Rs. 4,13,02,850/-. The godown keeper, Shri Prashant Abbot, admitted the goods were of foreign origin without lawful import evidence. Further searches led to the recovery of additional goods worth Rs. 61,44,000/- from another location. The Commissioner confiscated the goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act and imposed penalties under Section 112(a) and 112(b).

2. Validity of the Statements and Evidence:
The appellant, Shri Chander Shekar Juneja, contested the allegations, stating he had no connection with the seized goods. His defense included:
- An altercation with Shri Prashant Abbot on 30-6-99, supported by a police complaint.
- Evidence of being in Calcutta on 1st and 2nd July 1999, supported by an affidavit, lease deed, and power of attorney.
- The handwriting expert's report indicating the documents were not written by him.
- Lack of incriminating evidence from his residence and shop searches.
The Tribunal noted discrepancies in the investigation, such as the failure to verify the lease agreement, the complaint, and the affidavit. The Tribunal also pointed out the lack of identification of the appellant by key witnesses and the absence of investigation into the mobile phone ownership.

3. Appropriateness of the Penalties and Fines:
The Tribunal found that the evidence against the appellant was insufficient and uncorroborated. The statement of Shri Prashant Abbot was not supported by other evidence, and the appellant's presence in Calcutta on the relevant dates was not rebutted by the Department. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant could not be definitively linked to the hiring of the godown or the smuggled goods. Consequently, the penalties and fines imposed on the appellant were set aside.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on Shri Chander Shekar Juneja under Section 112 of the Customs Act and the order allowing him to redeem the confiscated goods on payment of a fine of Rs. 1.5 crore. The appeal was disposed of in favor of the appellant, granting him the benefit of the doubt due to insufficient evidence linking him to the seized goods.