9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (4) TMI 301X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, Member (T)]. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that M/s. ABC India Ltd. had loaded a consignment of particle board at Bhuentshollong in Bhutan for shipment to Kerala. At a Customs border, the goods were checked and the lorry permitted to enter India on 10-10-1996. On 19-10-1996, the vehicle was intercepted at Rasulgarh in Orissa. The search of the Truck revealed the goods of foreig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection established between the appellants and the contraband. He stated that the fact that the documents pertaining to sales tax were issued on the border would indicate that the truck contained only particle boards up to the point of entry into India. If any person had misused the truck by loading contraband, thereafter, his clients could not be held responsible for such loading or carriage of co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K. Roy, ld. JDR defended the impugned order. He stated that it has been mentioned in the show cause notice that the drivers who actually drove the lorry were different from the names given in the loading slip issued by the transport broker. It was his claim that the transport brokers were habitually engaged by the appellants and that the deliberate change of the drivers was known to them. 4. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eeded to hold the present appellants guilty for transporting the contraband goods. Such cryptic orders which are based on no evidences at all cannot survive. We find that no justification has been made in the Collector s order for him to have imposed a penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act on the present appellants. As regards the confiscation of the particle boards under Section 119, we ob ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
