1988 (9) TMI 215 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the respondent illegally exported 50 pcs. of silver to Hong Kong.
2. Whether the letter dated 14-5-1980 from Hong Kong Customs is admissible as evidence.
3. Whether corroborative evidence is required to prove the charge of illegal exportation of silver.
4. Whether the testimony of the Airlines regarding no extra freight paid by the respondent supports the defense.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Illegal Export of Silver:
The appeal challenges the exoneration of the respondent from the charge of illegally exporting 50 pcs. of silver valued at Rs. 1,67,000/- to Hong Kong. The adjudicating authority had given the benefit of doubt to the respondent based on the absence of corroborative evidence and the testimony of the Airlines that no extra freight was paid. However, the appellate tribunal found that the respondent's admission of traveling to Hong Kong on the specified date, coupled with the detailed entry in the official records of Hong Kong Customs, sufficiently proved the illegal exportation of silver. The tribunal emphasized that mere denial by the respondent without any supporting evidence was not credible.

2. Admissibility of the Letter from Hong Kong Customs:
The letter dated 14-5-1980 from the Hong Kong Customs was argued to be inadmissible by the respondent's counsel due to lack of opportunity for cross-examination and non-compliance with Section 138B of the Customs Act. The tribunal, however, held that the letter was admissible as it contained extracts from official records maintained by a public servant in the discharge of official duty, making it a public document under Section 35 of the Evidence Act. The tribunal cited various precedents to support the admissibility of such official records in departmental proceedings, even if strict rules of evidence do not apply.

3. Requirement of Corroborative Evidence:
The adjudicating authority had initially found that the absence of corroborative evidence weakened the case against the respondent. The tribunal, however, clarified that corroboration is not a rule of law but a rule of prudence, and in departmental proceedings under the Customs Act, strict adherence to the Evidence Act is not required. The tribunal found that the detailed entry in the official records of Hong Kong Customs, coupled with the respondent's admission of travel details, was sufficient to establish the charge without needing further corroboration.

4. Testimony of the Airlines:
The defense argued that the testimony of the Airlines, stating that no extra freight was paid, supported their case. The tribunal dismissed this argument, noting that the weight of the silver could have been within the permissible baggage allowance, especially since the respondent traveled with another individual whose baggage allowance could be combined. The tribunal found that the absence of extra freight payment did not negate the evidence of illegal exportation of silver.

Conclusion:
The tribunal allowed the appeal, set aside the exoneration order, and held that the respondent had indeed illegally exported 50 pcs. of silver to Hong Kong. The tribunal imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- on the respondent, considering the value of the goods and the impact of economic offenses like smuggling on the national economy.