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

TMI Blog

Home

1987 (7) TMI 303

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an be accepted when the panchas did not support the panchnama. (2) Whether the statement of the applicant Shri Raman Mangal Patel recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 can be treated as voluntary when it was actually obtained under duress and force after beating him. (3) Whether the applicant s statement regarding 200 metallic yarn being stored in the motor vehicle can be treated as a confession of his knowledge when the gold bars were hidden in the car and whether the statement would justify the penalty under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act. 2. On behalf of the applicant, Shri Bhatt briefly narrated the facts of the case leading to the apprehension of the motor car in which the applicant was travelling on the night .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ained in the application were points of law which required to be clarified by reference to the Hon ble Gujarat High Court. 3. On behalf of the Collector, Shri S. Senthivel contended that none of these points were questions of law. All these related to the appreciation of evidence. Whether the panchanama could be taken as evidence of recovery of the gold from the applicant s car, was a questions of evidence and not one of law. Besides it had not been contended before the Tribunal at the time of hearing of the applicant s appeal that the recovery of the gold should not be accepted as the panchnama was not a good evidence in the matter. Shri Senthivel further argued that the detention of the motor vehicle MRX 8145 by the Customs office on th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sted in the application of Shri Raman Mangal Patel, it is seen that the question regarding evidentiary value of the panchnama in the recovery of the gold should not be accepted because the panchas did not support it was never contended by the applicant at the time of the hearing of his appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, this is not a point which was included in the Tribunal s order and hence it cannot be referred to the High Court for clarification as requested by the applicant. As regards the contention that the applicant s statement was obtained after beating him, it is seen that this contention was examined in Para 13 of the Tribunal s order. But the Tribunal observed that no evidence was brought forward to support the contention. Be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , heard together and a common order was passed. During the hearing of the appeal the seizure of the gold from the car in which the present applicant was travelling had not been disputed. The seizure was effected under a panchnama. The panchnama is not a substantial evidence. It only evidences the fact of seizure and the panchnama become admissible in evidence to evidence the seizure. The statements contained therein will not be admissible as substantive evidence. They could be used either for corroborating or contradicting the panchas in whose presence the seizure was effected. This bench in its order in the appeals did not make use of the panchnama for any purpose other than as evidencing the seizure of gold bars and therefore the question .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... w the nature, seat or even the age of the injuries , and unless it is shown that these details fit in with the detention by the customs officers, no inference could be drawn in favour of the torture theory. It is besides the point that for the reason better known to them the appellants did not pursue his complaint and preferred to get into default. 8 It is thus seen that the Bench did consider the contention regarding voluntary nature of the statement of the appellant. It was not contended during the hearing of this application that any of the observations contained in the order of the Tribunal is incorrect or not based on facts. As such question at Serial No. 2 cannot be considered as a question of law and hence cannot be referred to the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates