9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (2) TMI 282X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case are that after the Gold Biscuits were seized from the one possession of Shri Jamal Kunnummel while he was in transit in a bus, the present appellant was apprehended near the said Shri Jamal s residence in a Jeep along with some other persons who fled from the Jeep. It is alleged by the department that the said Jamal implicated the appellant as the person who was supposed to receive the Cold and to pay him a sum of Rs. 47,000/- as remuneration for transport of the Gold and also to take possession of the said Gold. 3. Learned Advocate submits that the Commissioner in his Order-in- Original has already ordered that there was no evidence to show that Rs. 47,000/- another Rs. 3,000/- found on the person of the appellant was in fact sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Learned Advocate now submits that they have since submitted an application to accept as additional evidence at this stage and an Affidavit from the said Shri Salih Koya Thangal to the effect that it was he who had lent Rs. 50,000/- to the appellant for the purpose of giving it to his associate, one Shri Shafi . Learned Advocate submits that the said person who has now given the Affidavit was out of the country and therefore this affidavit could not be secured earlier and placed before the adjudicating authority. He therefore submits that except for the statement by the co-accused namely Jamal, there is no evidence against the appellant. Even the statement of Shri Jamal was recorded by the Customs Officers after the appellant was apprehended ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce given by the co-accused. In this case, it is clear from the records as well as the submissions made that there is no other evidence which corroborates the implicatory statement of Shri Jamal as far as Shri K.Moideen is concerned. The only corroboratory evidence was the money found from the appellant which the original authority has himself come to the conclusion that the money does not represent the sale proceeds . As against this, the appellant has given an explanation , which is now, though belatedly, supported by an affidavit of Shri Salih Koya Thangal to the effect that the money belonged to him and the appellant was merely a career of that money since he was going to the same place where the money was to be given to Shri Shafi. I f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
