2001 (1) TMI 389

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Singh, the issue involved is whether his truck is liable for confiscation and whether penalty is imposable on him under the Customs Act. 2. Shri A.C. Jain, ld. Advocate, mentioned at the outset that he is not challenging the smuggled nature of the goods carried in his truck No. UP 78B/0266. He, further, mentioned that his truck went to deliver pulse at Motihari; that his driver Shrikant loaded .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the smuggled goods; that in any case Shrikant had not deposed that he (the Appellant) had directed him to load the impugned goods. The ld. Advocate read out the statements of Shrikant in support of his contention. The ld. Advocate also mentioned that the Appellant did not have any knowledge of contraband goods loaded in his truck; that nothing incriminating was found in his residential premises; .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o load the smuggled goods at Motihari. The ld. DR emphasised that there are sufficient circumstantial evidence against the Appellant and as such penalty is imposable upon him under the Customs Act. 4. I nave considered the submissions of both the sides. The driver Shrikant was the person in charge of the vehicle at the time it was intercepted and contraband goods were found loaded in the truck. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X