Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2012 (10) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2012 (10) TMI 1017 - AT - Customs

Issues involved: Seizure of garlic of third country origin loaded in trucks, confiscation of vehicles, imposition of penalties, non-receipt of original show-cause notice dated 24.08.2009 by the appellants, non-service of the show-cause notice resulting in violation of natural justice, provisional release of a vehicle to a party not made a party in the addendum to the show-cause notice.

Seizure of Garlic and Confiscation of Vehicles:
The trucks loaded with garlic of third country origin were intercepted and seized by Customs for violation of provisions of Customs Act, 1962. The garlic and the trucks were placed under seizure under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. Later, a show-cause notice was issued on 24.08.09. The seized garlic was absolutely confiscated, and the vehicles were confiscated under Section 115 of the Customs Act, 1962 with an option to redeem on payment of redemption fines. Penalties were also imposed on the owners of the vehicles. The appellants challenged the confiscation of vehicles and imposition of penalties before the Tribunal.

Non-Receipt of Original Show-Cause Notice:
The appellants contended that they did not receive the original show-cause notice dated 24.08.2009, which was not detailed in the adjudication order by the Commissioner. The Department reported that while the copy of the show-cause notice was available, it could not be ascertained whether it was served on the appellants. The absence of the original show-cause notice was argued to result in a violation of the principle of natural justice, making the impugned order legally flawed.

Provisional Release of Vehicle and Party's Status:
One of the appellants, Smt. Meera Devi, owner of a confiscated vehicle, had the vehicle provisionally released to her but was not made a party in the addendum to the show-cause notice. The appeal was filed to safeguard her interests, as it was unclear whether she was made a party in the original show-cause notice. The confiscation of her vehicle was challenged as contrary to the law, and it was argued that she should have been included in the proceedings.

Judgment:
After considering the arguments and perusing the records, the Tribunal found that the non-service of the original show-cause notice dated 24.08.2009 resulted in gross injustice to the appellants. Additionally, the failure to include Smt. Meera Devi as a party in the proceedings raised concerns. The Tribunal set aside the order of confiscation of vehicles and imposition of penalties, remanding the cases to the Commissioner for a fresh determination. The Commissioner was directed to serve a copy of the show-cause notice dated 24.08.2009 on all appellants, allowing them to file necessary replies and providing a reasonable opportunity for a hearing. Both parties were permitted to produce necessary evidence in the fresh proceedings. All appeals were disposed of accordingly.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates