1983 (10) TMI 259 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Confiscation of goods seized from residence
- Imposition of personal penalty on appellants

Confiscation of Goods Seized from Residence:
The judgment pertains to two appeals challenging an order of absolute confiscation of goods seized from the residence of the appellants, along with the imposition of a personal penalty of Rs. 20,000 on each appellant. The goods seized were of foreign origin, including textiles and cassette tapes, with a value of Rs. 14,151 C.I.F. and Rs. 42,453 M.V. The appellants failed to provide any documents or satisfactory explanation for the importation or acquisition of the goods. The husband admitted to purchasing goods from Pakistani passengers, while the wife stated she sold goods only in his absence. The Additional Collector based the confiscation and penalty on these admissions. The appellants did not contest the confiscation but argued the penalty was excessive.

Imposition of Personal Penalty on Appellants:
The appellants contended that the penalty of Rs. 20,000 each was disproportionate, considering their financial status, ongoing prosecution, and the value of the goods seized. The J.D.R. argued that the penalty was justified due to the appellants' history of smuggling activities and lack of deterrence from previous penalties. The Tribunal analyzed the imposition of the penalty, noting that the husband had a previous smuggling case with a Rs. 4,000 penalty, while the wife had no prior cases. The Additional Collector failed to differentiate the roles of the appellants, imposing the same penalty on both despite the wife's limited involvement. The Tribunal considered the gravity of the offense, extent of participation, and extenuating circumstances. They found the penalty excessive and reduced it to Rs. 15,000 for the husband and Rs. 5,000 for the wife, based on their respective roles.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal partially allowed the appeals, reducing the penalties imposed on the appellants. The husband's penalty was reduced to Rs. 15,000, and the wife's penalty was reduced to Rs. 5,000. The appellants were granted consequential relief within three months from the date of the order.