1996 (9) TMI 249 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues involved: Interpretation of Section 119 of the Customs Act in relation to confiscation of goods used for concealing contraband items.

In the present case, a truck was intercepted containing contraband goods concealed under soda ash bags consigned to the appellant. The Customs Act was invoked to order confiscation of the soda ash bags under Section 119 on the basis that they were used for concealing the contraband goods. The Judicial Member, Shri S.V. Singh, argued that the mere fact of contraband goods being concealed under the soda ash bags rendered the bags liable for confiscation under Section 119 as an article used for concealment.

However, upon examination, it was established that the gunny bags and the packages containing contraband goods were separate entities, with the contraband not actually concealed within the soda ash bags. The contraband items were merely "covered" by the soda ash bags in the truck. It was emphasized that for Section 119 to apply, the articles must have been used for the purpose of concealing the smuggled goods, not just covering them. The distinction between "concealment" and "covering" was crucial in determining the applicability of Section 119. Importantly, no connection was established between the owners of the soda ash bags and the owners of the smuggled goods, nor was there any allegation that the appellants were involved in carrying the contraband goods. Consequently, the decision to invoke Section 119 in relation to the soda ash bags was deemed incorrect, and the order of confiscation was set aside, leading to the allowance of the appeal.