9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (12) TMI 241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der per : G.N. Srinivasan, Member (J)]. These two appeals have been filed against the decision of the Collector of Customs (Preventive), Mumbai made in order in original No. S/14-5-375/88, dated 3-5-1990 under Section 112(b) as well as under the then existing Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act. The facts of the cases are that on 18-10-1988, the DRI officers of Bombay unit intercepted a Baj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under both the Acts. 2. It is stated by Shri Sonawane, the ld. Consultant appearing for the appellant, that the appellant Gulabchand Jain when he was taken into custody was examined by the Chief Medical Officer attached to the Bombay Central Prison and has given a certificate on 10-12-1988 and it reveals injuries in periarbital region, contusion over costal region, tenderness over both testis. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ues that the notice has been issued after a period of 6 months as obviously under Section 110 of the Customs Act. 3. Mr. Chatterjee arguing on behalf of the department states that as far as notice is concerned even if it is admitted that it has been belatedly issued, even then the confiscation cannot be questioned and he relies on the judgement of the Supreme Court in J.K. Bardolia Mills. v. M.L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esents the sale of smuggled goods. Without going into the other points made by Shri Sonawane, we have to hold that this money Rs. 2,87,560/- cannot be ordered to be confiscated. It should be returned to the appellant. 5. As far as the penalties imposed on the appellant is concerned Shri Sonawane informs us that at the time when the stay petition was argued, the appellant was asked to pay Rs. 20, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
