9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Confiscation of the vehicle and imposition of penalty under Sections 112 and 117 of the Customs Act. 2. Allegation of abetment against the appellant. 3. Discrepancy in statements regarding the parking of the vehicle. 4. Validity of the show cause notice and penalty imposed. Analysis: The appeal was filed against an adjudication order that confiscated a vehicle and imposed penalties under the Customs Act. The vehicle, with foreign 'Ganja', was seized, leading to a show cause notice for confiscation and penalties. The appellant denied abetting the offense, claiming the vehicle was stolen from in front of a house. The Respondent argued against this claim, stating the confiscation and penalties were justified. The Tribunal considered the conflicting statements regarding the vehicle's parking. While the appellant claimed it was parked in front of a house, another statement contradicted this, leading to doubts about the appellant's version. The vehicle was found carrying illegal substances, justifying its confiscation under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act. Regarding the penalty, the Tribunal noted the appellant's false statement and the presence of illegal substances in the vehicle as evidence of abetment. However, the Tribunal found fault with the penalty imposition under Section 112 without proper notice. It was determined that penalizing under Section 117 for abetment was appropriate, with a maximum penalty of Rs. 1,000. Consequently, the penalty was reduced from Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 1,000, in line with Section 117 provisions. In conclusion, the Tribunal confirmed the confiscation of the vehicle and the redemption fine but modified the penalty imposed on the appellant. The appeal was dismissed with the mentioned modifications, ensuring compliance with the Customs Act provisions and the principles of natural justice.
|
