9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Application for dispensing with the condition of predeposit of penalty amount imposed on the appellant.
Summary: The appellant was penalized based on the statement of a person from whom gold was recovered, which was later retracted. The appellant's non-appearance before Customs Officers was due to a medical operation, which does not imply involvement in smuggling activities. Legal precedents were cited where penalties were set aside due to lack of corroborative evidence. The appellant's premises search yielded no incriminating evidence. The Revenue argued that the person's detailed statement implicates both himself and the appellant, citing legal judgments supporting the admissibility of such statements. The Tribunal found the only basis for penalizing the appellant was the co-accused's statement without independent evidence. The appellant's address disclosure by the person does not prove involvement. Legal principles dictate the need for concrete evidence in penal proceedings under the Customs Act. The penalty under Section 112(b) was deemed inapplicable as the appellant had not taken possession of the goods. The Tribunal dispensed with the pre-deposit condition and set aside the penalty, concluding the appeal and Stay Petition. This judgment highlights the importance of substantial evidence in penal proceedings and the necessity of corroborative proof to establish charges under the Customs Act.
|
