9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (5) TMI 269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Coimbatore. On 2-6-83, the Central Excise Authorities intercepted one Chidambaram at Walayar when he was travelling by a bus bound for Palghat from Coimbatore and recovered from him 74 items of gold ornaments detailed in the impugned order. The said Chidambaram informed the authorities that the ornaments belonged to the appellant herein and were being taken to one M/s. Balakrishnan Brothers at Calicut for sale, without any supporting documents. The authorities, therefore, seized all the ornaments in question under a mahazar. The said Chidambaram gave a statement on 2-6-83 that the ornaments under seizure belonged to the appellant but subsequently retracted the same on 5-6-83. The proceedings instituted after further investigations eventua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entioned in the chit do not in any way tally with the ornaments under seizure either in terms of number of items or in terms of weight. 4. Heard Shri K.K. Bhatia, the learned D.R. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made before me. The appellant has been fastened with penal liability on charges of contravention of Sections 36 and 55 of the Act and the question that arises for determination is whether the evidence on record substantiates the charges. In the present case, the ornaments under seizure were recovered from the possession of one Chidambaram and the said Chidambaram has given a statement that the same belonged to the appellant. The appellant has totally disclaimed and disowned any connection with the ornaments in que ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce. The chit also does not in any way help the Department because apart from the fact that the chits have not been specifically set out as a piece of evidence relied upon against the appellant in the show cause notice, the chits by themselves do not in any way go against the appellant. The adjudicating authority and the lower appellate authority would appear to proceed on the assumption that the writings in the chits are the writings of the appellant. There is no warrant for such a finding. The chits were not referred to the handwriting expert. Even assuming for the purpose of argument that the chits are written by the appellant, the figures mentioned in the chits do not in any way tally with the ornaments under seizure and at any rate the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
