9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kumar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. - Appellants filed these appeals against the common adjudication order whereby penalty of Rs. 1 lakh each was imposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 8-8-91 officers of the Customs Department intercepted a car driven by one Shri Ajay Kumar Goel. On search of the car 190 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court on the complaint filed by the Customs authority. He further submitted that there is no evidence against the appellant regarding their involvement in the sale or purchase of the smuggled goods. The only evidence against the appellant is the statement of Shri Ajay Kumar Goel which is not corporated in any independent evidence. Shri Ajay Kumar Goel also retracted from his statement. In these ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecovery of gold and also gave detail of the role of present appellant in the sale and purchase of the smuggled gold. Shri Ajay Kumar Goel made a statement on the date of recovery of the gold and, there is no averment by the present appellant that the statement was made under duress. The statement was detracted on 14-10-1991 i.e. after two months. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Naresh J. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner. It can, therefore, be used as substantive evidence connecting the petitioner with the contravention by exporting foreign currency out of India. Therefore we do not think that there is any illegality in the order of confiscation of foreign currency and imposition of penalty." 7. In the present case Sh. Ajay Kumar Goel made a detailed statement at the time of recovery of the gold an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
