9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (5) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om this the truck from where the goods were seized has been confiscated with redemption fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and the Maruti Van allegedly being used for piloting the said truck has been confiscated with redemption fine of Rs. 25,000/-. 3. Personal penalties as shown below have been imposed upon various appellants. (a) Anil Kumar - Rs. 25,000/- (b) Ashoke Kumar - Rs. 15,000/- (c) Vinod Kumar - Rs. 25,000/- (d) Prem Nath Prasad - Rs. 25,000/- (e) Ashoke Tiwary - Rs. 20,000/- (f) Dinesh Kumar - Rs. 25,000/- 4. The appellants are not challenging the confiscation of the foreign orig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the residential premises of Shri Prem Nath Prasad was put to search on 22-3-1997, but nothing incriminating was recovered. During investigations statement of Shri Vinod Prasad, Shri Dinesh Kumar and Shri Prem Nath Prasad were recorded on various dates. Whereas it was admitted by them that the truck and the Maruti van belong to the two brothers, any connection with the contraband goods was denied by them. They further stated that the truck is used as a public carrier and is under the control of the driver. As regards the Maruti van, Shri Vinod Kumar submitted that the said van was given by him to his friends. They further disclosed that it was due to enemity with some political leaders that their names have been dragged into the case. 5.4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on was by a team of officers along with police officers headed by Superintendent of police and there is every chance that the said statements were recorded when the Police officials were still present. He submits that in their reply to the show cause notice they have retracted the said statements. Furthermore the said statements have not found any independent corroboration inasmuch as the three brothers i.e. Prem Nath Prasad, Vinod Kumar and Dinesh Kumar have denied their ownership of the seized goods. He submits that in the absence of the corroboration of the facts disclosed by these three persons in their alleged voluntary statements, no reliance can be placed upon the same. Apart from this there is no other evidence on record to connect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led modus operandi adopted by the owner of the goods. The statements are detailed one disclosing the details of the previous transactions. The said stand taken by the appellant was further repeated by them in their interrogatory statements. The said statements were never retracted by the applicants and they have not made any grievance that the same were recorded under duress and pressure. As such the adjudicating authority has rightly placed reliance upon the same taking them to be voluntary statements. 7.2 As regards the corroboration point, he submits that all these statements are of the applicants themselves and in fact, are corroborating each other. As such, no independent evidences for corroborating the same were required. He also s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tailed account of escorting of these smuggled goods on previous occasions also. I also find that these statements were never retracted by the appellants at any point of time except at the time of filing reply to the show cause notice. The Hon ble High Court in the case Surjit Singh Cahbra has held statements recorded before the Customs authorities is an admissible piece of evidence and it s belated retraction has to be weighted with due caution. The ld. Consultant s plea that since the seizure was effected in the presence of the police officials, they may be present at the time of recording of the statements is only of presumptive nature and is not based upon any evidence on record. The statements given by three persons corroborate each oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used for transporting smuggled items with the knowledge of the driver which is evident from the fact that the driver immediately abandoned the truck on seeing the Customs Officers. As such the same is liable to confiscation. However, the redemption fine imposed is reduced from Rs. l lakh to Rs. 75,000/-. 11. As regards the confiscation of Maruti van, the finding against the appellant is that the same was being used for escorting the truck carrying contraband. As per the provisions of Rule 115(2) the conveyance used as a means of transport in the smuggling of any goods or in the carriage of any smuggled goods shall be liable to confiscation. The Maruti van cannot be said to have been used for carrying any smuggled goods or as a means of tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
