9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (4) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 26-2-1993 when Shri N. Singh, Consultant appeared on behalf of the applicant. The respondents were represented by Shri V.K. Sharma, SDR. 4. Shri Singh, the learned Consultant pleaded that the applicant was an old lady who was used as a carrier for smuggling foreign marked gold pieces. Relying up on the Tribunal s decision in the case - Balvir Singh v. Collector of Customs, 1991 (56) E.L.T. 64 (Tribunal), he submitted that the applicant has a good case on merits, and that the requirement of pre-deposit may be waived, and the Department directed not to enforce recovery till the disposal of the appeal. 5. Shri V.K. Sharma, the learned SDR submitted that it was a case of smuggling of gold, and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance of law. 10. On adjudication, the smuggled gold was confiscated absolutely, and a personal penalty of Rs. 10,000 was imposed on Mrs. Sabra. 11. The gold was secreted and was sought to be smuggled into the country. The way it was concealed and the fact of non-declaration even when she was specifically asked in this behalf, prima facie, indicates that she was aware of the fact that bringing gold into the country without authority was illegal. 12. The gold was recovered at the time of arrival of the passenger. There was specific allegation in the show cause notice. There was no ambiguity about the allegation. In the Order passed by the Additional Collector there were clear finding that the gold was smuggled and had not been declared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of seizure of sale proceeds of contraband gold. Before the Tribunal, learned Counsel for the appellant had relied upon the ruling of the Madras High Court in the case - B. Lakshmi Chand v. Government of India, reported in 1983 (12) E.L.T. 322 (Mad.) and the Tribunal s decision in the case of Collector of Customs, Chandigarh v. Ajit Singh, 1987 (14) ECC 360. The Tribunal observed that the Show Cause Notice contained all circumstances and necessary ingredients regarding the charge, and the appellant did not at any point of time expressed any difficulty in understanding the charge he was called upon to meet. Tribunal came to a finding in that case that the ruling of the Madras High Court referred to above had no application to the facts and ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
