2008 (9) TMI 757 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
Stay applications against penalty for aiding and abetting export of foreign currency based on confessional statements retracted before Magistrate.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Retraction of Confessional Statements
The applicants contested the penalty imposed based on their confessional statements, arguing that they retracted the statements before the Magistrate. The Tribunal noted that the retraction was made through a bail application submitted by their advocate, without separate retraction letters to the custom authorities. The Tribunal found no evidence of threat, force, or pressure used to obtain the confessions. It held that the mere retraction in a bail application was insufficient to discard the confessional statements. The Tribunal emphasized that the absence of complaints of ill-treatment against the officer who recorded the statements lent credibility to the confessions. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the applicants failed to establish a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit.

Issue 2: Financial Condition of the Applicants
Considering the financial condition of the applicants as low-paid employees of the airways, the Tribunal directed them to deposit a reduced sum of Rs. 15,000 each towards the penalty within 12 weeks. Upon payment of this amount, the Tribunal granted a waiver from pre-deposit of the balance penalty amount and stayed the recovery until the disposal of the appeals. The Tribunal balanced the financial circumstances of the applicants with the need for penalty enforcement, ensuring a fair resolution while upholding the penalty imposition based on the confessional statements.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the penalty for aiding and abetting export of foreign currency based on the confessional statements, emphasizing the lack of evidence of coercion and the credibility of the statements due to the absence of complaints of ill-treatment. The Tribunal provided a nuanced decision by considering the financial hardship of the applicants, allowing a reduced initial deposit and staying the recovery of the balance penalty amount pending appeal disposal. Compliance with the payment directive was required by a specified date to proceed with the case.