2015 (1) TMI 159 - AT - Customs

Detention of trucks - Trucks carrying smuggled goods - Imposition of penalty & redemption fine - Held that - During the course of the investigation, a statement of the appellant is recorded and as per the statement, it is mentioned that the driver i.e. Shri Nagesh Vithal approached Mahananda Transport on the direction of Wilfred Transport Margoa for delivery of some goods. The owner of M/s. Mahananda Transport took his truck for loading; that they are concerned with transport of goods loaded by their transport agent and they are not concerned with the contents of the packages; that the driver was unaware of the contents of the packages or their origin; the goods were loaded from the container which according to him lies under the customs control; that they are innocent and the truck was used for earning freight charges only. This statement has not been controverted and being a truck owner, the appellant has transported the goods in good faith. Therefore, the confiscation of the truck is not required. Accordingly, redemption fine is also not required to be imposed. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against penalty and redemption fine imposed on the appellant for involvement in smuggling of goods.

Analysis:
The appellant appealed against the penalty and redemption fine imposed on them for their involvement in the smuggling of goods. The case involved the detention of two trucks carrying air conditioners of foreign origin, which were found to be smuggled goods. The adjudication held the trucks liable for confiscation and imposed a penalty of &8377; 20,000 on the appellant as the owner of the truck who aided and abetted in the smuggling. The appellant did not appear but requested a decision on merits due to inability to appear. The appellate tribunal considered the statement of the appellant, where it was mentioned that they were unaware of the contents of the packages or their origin, and transported the goods in good faith for earning freight charges only. This statement was not controverted, leading the tribunal to set aside the impugned order regarding the redemption fine and penalty against the appellant, allowing the appeal with consequential relief.

In conclusion, the appellate tribunal overturned the imposition of the redemption fine and penalty on the appellant based on the appellant's statement indicating innocence and lack of knowledge about the smuggled goods being transported in their trucks. The tribunal found that the appellant, as a truck owner, had transported the goods in good faith for earning freight charges only, and therefore, the confiscation of the truck and the redemption fine were deemed unnecessary. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any, in favor of the appellant.