2013 (6) TMI 149 - HC - Customs

Case on the basis of three bags and a blanket belonging recovered from the bus - held that - it appears that in the statement, Sri Ram Kumar Mishra, submitted that he was falsely implicated in the case as he was not having cordial relations with the officers of the custom department. At the same time, fact remains that the items were recovered from the Bus. It was never stated that items recovered from the opposite parties who were also travelling in the bus. In the bus, there may be number of passengers along with their personal belongings. No red handed items were recovered from the opposite parties. So, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal appears reasonable. Moreover, in the instant case, total amount involved is Rs. 60,000/- (sixty thousand) only. Unfortunately, the department-shamelessly has filed the present petition for this meager amount, where the litigation cost is much higher than the amount involved. The department is advised not to file such type of petitions in future, involving the petty amount. - decided against the revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Petition against Customs Tribunal order dated 8-5-2002 - Recovery of items belonging to a third country origin - Penalty imposed on opposite parties - Appeal by opposite parties allowed by Commissioner - Department's appeal dismissed by Tribunal - Writ petition filed by Department against Tribunal's order.

Analysis:
The High Court considered a petition against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The case involved the recovery of items, including parts of a computer of third country origin, from a bus belonging to an individual named Sri Ram Kumar Mishra. Sri Ram Kumar Mishra implicated two individuals, Sri Chandra Prakash Khosla and Sri Ashok Kumar Abrol, as being involved in the matter. Subsequently, penalties of Rs. 25,000/- and Rs. 35,000/- were imposed on the respective individuals. The Commissioner (Appeals) Customs and Central Excise allowed the appeal of the opposite parties, leading to the Department filing an appeal before the Tribunal, which was ultimately dismissed. The Department then filed a writ petition challenging the Tribunal's decision.

The Court noted that Sri Ram Kumar Mishra claimed he was falsely implicated due to strained relations with customs officers, but items were indeed recovered from the bus. However, there was no evidence that the recovered items belonged to the opposite parties, as there were multiple passengers with personal belongings on the bus. Notably, no items were seized directly from the opposite parties. The Court found the Tribunal's decision reasonable and upheld it along with the stated reasons.

Furthermore, the Court highlighted that the total amount involved in the case was Rs. 60,000/- only. The Department was criticized for pursuing the matter despite the insignificant amount, as the litigation costs far exceeded the sum in question. The Court advised the Department against filing such petitions for trivial amounts in the future. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed by the Court, emphasizing the disproportionate nature of the litigation costs compared to the value of the case.

In conclusion, the High Court's judgment upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the lack of evidence connecting the recovered items to the opposite parties and criticizing the Department for pursuing the matter over a nominal sum. The Court's dismissal of the writ petition served as a reminder for the Department to exercise discretion in initiating legal actions involving minimal amounts to avoid unnecessary costs and burdens on the legal system.