1999 (8) TMI 391 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues involved: Imposition of penalties under Sec. 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 on Tane Rao Singh, Allar Khan, and Shri Gobind Lal based on the recovery of smuggled gold biscuits.

Details of the Judgment:

1. Imposition of Penalties: The Commissioner of Customs imposed penalties on Tane Rao Singh, Allar Khan, and Shri Gobind Lal under Sec. 112 of the Customs Act, 1962, based on the recovery of foreign marked gold biscuits from a truck driven by Chagan Dhan and accompanied by Tane Rao Singh.

2. Involvement of Tane Rao Singh: Tane Rao Singh admitted his role in transporting the smuggled gold to Allar Khan's residence as directed by Alia, for a remuneration of Rs. 5,000. His statement under Sec. 108 of the Customs Act was considered as substantive evidence connecting him to the contravention of the Customs Act.

3. Involvement of Allar Khan: Allar Khan acted in accordance with the directions of Shri Goverdhan Singh in the smuggling transaction, as per his statement under Sec. 108 of the Customs Act. Despite his denial and plea of personal enmity, the adjudication order was passed against him.

4. Defense of Allar Khan: Allar Khan's advocate argued that no statement was recorded from Allar Khan directly, and he was made to sign blank sheets while in jail. The evidence against him was primarily his statement, the statement of co-noticee, and the recovery of newspaper pages from his residence.

5. Defense of Tane Rao Singh: Tane Rao Singh's advocate argued that there was no evidence linking Shri Gobind Lal to the smuggling of gold. The statement signed by Tane Rao Singh was contested as lacking legal sanctity.

6. Judgment on Tane Rao Singh and Allar Khan: The Tribunal found both Tane Rao Singh and Allar Khan guilty based on their statements implicating themselves in the smuggling. Despite their plea of coercion in signing statements, the Tribunal reduced their penalties to Rs. 1,50,000 each considering the circumstances.

7. Judgment on Gobind Lal: Gobind Lal, the co-owner of the truck, was not present during the recovery of gold, and no evidence connected him to the smuggling. The penalty imposed on him was set aside, and his appeal was allowed.

This judgment highlights the importance of statements recorded under Sec. 108 of the Customs Act as substantive evidence, the role of co-noticees in establishing connections, and the consideration of circumstances in determining penalties.