2000 (10) TMI 353 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of truck used for transportation of smuggled goods.
2. Imposition of penalty on the driver of the truck.

Confiscation of Truck:
The case involved the confiscation of a truck used for transporting smuggled goods. The DRI officers intercepted the truck and found foreign origin goods inside. The driver and cleaner of the truck could not produce any legal documents for the goods. The Commissioner ordered the confiscation of the truck under the Customs Act. The appellants challenged this decision, arguing that there was no evidence to prove their knowledge or belief regarding the nature of the goods being transported. The Tribunal observed that there was no indication in the order that the owner of the truck or the driver had any knowledge of the smuggling. The Commissioner's decision was based on the driver acquiring possession of the goods and transporting them, but lacked reasoning and evidence to support this conclusion. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the confiscation of the truck.

Imposition of Penalty:
In addition to the confiscation of the truck, a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs was imposed on the driver of the truck. The Commissioner held the driver liable under specific sections of the Customs Act. However, the Tribunal noted that there was no proof that the driver had knowledge or reasonable belief about the goods being smuggled. The Commissioner's decision lacked reasoning and evidence to establish the driver's involvement in the smuggling operation. As a result, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty imposed on the driver could not be sustained. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeals and set aside both the confiscation of the truck and the penalty imposed on the driver.

In summary, the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, in the case involving the confiscation of a truck used for transporting smuggled goods and the imposition of a penalty on the driver, ruled in favor of the appellants. The Tribunal found that there was no evidence to prove the appellants' knowledge or belief regarding the smuggling operation. The decision to confiscate the truck and impose a penalty lacked reasoning and evidence, leading the Tribunal to set aside both the confiscation and the penalty.