1999 (9) TMI 329 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
Imposition of personal penalty and confiscation of truck under Section 115 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Imposition of Personal Penalty:
The appellant, the owner of the truck carrying silk yarn of foreign origin, was imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 50,000. The appellant denied any knowledge or involvement in the transportation of the contraband goods, stating that his driver handled the loading and fare collection. The adjudicating authority inferred guilt due to the appellant's initial non-appearance for interrogation. However, the appellate tribunal found no evidence implicating the appellant in the smuggling activities. The tribunal set aside the penalty, emphasizing that the appellant's subsequent cooperation and statements do not justify imposing a penalty solely based on initial non-compliance.

Confiscation of Truck:
Regarding the confiscation of the truck, the appellant argued that the driver's lack of connection to the contraband goods and absence of his statement consenting to the loading warranted non-confiscation. The Revenue opposed this argument, citing the truck's involvement in transporting the contraband as justifying confiscation under Section 115 of the Customs Act. The tribunal acknowledged the truck's role in transporting the goods but noted the lack of explicit denial by the driver regarding knowledge of the goods. Considering the appellant's financial and health conditions, the tribunal reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 5,000. Ultimately, the tribunal upheld the confiscation of the truck but reduced the redemption fine due to the circumstances.

Conclusion:
The appellate tribunal set aside the personal penalty imposed on the appellant, emphasizing the lack of evidence linking the appellant to the smuggling activities. However, the tribunal upheld the confiscation of the truck under Section 115 of the Customs Act, considering its involvement in transporting contraband goods. The tribunal reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 5,000, considering the appellant's financial constraints and health condition. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.