9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 491X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : Rs. 3.00 lakhs; (ii) Md. Abdul Jabbar : Rs. 1.00 lakh; (iii) Shri S. Manihar Singh : Rs. 1.00 lakh; (iv) Shri Sunil Paul : Rs. 1.00 lakh; (v) Md. Abdul Haque : Rs. 1.00 lakh. 2. As per the facts on record, the Customs Officers intercepted one Tata Sumo on 11-11-99 on the basis of specific information. Two persons, Shri Shyamal Chakraborty and Shri Basudev Das were found sitting in front site of the vehicle which was being driven by the driver, Md. Abdul Haque. On search of the person of Shri Shyamal Chakraborty, 14 numbers of gold bars wrapped in adhesive tapes and concealed in the black leather shoes worn by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earch but nothing contraband was recovered. The said person in his statement before the Officers denied any connection with the seized 14 numbers of gold bars or with Shri Basudev Das. It was also found that the Tata Sumo belonged to Smt. Sabita Das wife of Shri Basudev Das. 5. Based upon the above facts, the show cause notice proposing confiscation of the seized gold bars and imposing personal penalties upon the various persons was issued to all the persons concerned, inter alia, the appellants. The said show cause notice culminated into the impugned order passed by the Commissioner vide which apart from absolutely confiscating the seized gold bars and the vehicle; he imposed the personal penalties upon the various persons as detailed ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has appeared on behalf of Shri Sunil Paul. 9. I have also heard Shri T.K. Kar, ld. SDR appearing for the Revenue who reiterates the reasoning of the adjudicating authority. 10. After carefully considering the submissions made from both sides and after going through the impugned order, I find that as rightly contended by the ld. Consultant appearing on behalf of Smt. Sabita Das and Md. Abdul Haque, the Commissioner has not discussed any evidences on record so as to show the involvement of the said persons in the seized gold bars, apart from observing, all of them are liable to penalty. It is on record that Md. Abdul Haque in his spot statement before the Customs Officers have denied his knowledge about the carrying of gold bars by the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he gold bars were delivered to him by Md. Abdul Haque and Shri Sunil Paul and were further to be delivered by him to Shri Manihar Singh. The searches made at the business as well as residential premises of the said three persons have not resulted in recovery of any contraband or incriminating documents. The said person in their statement before the officers have also denied their connection either with the seized gold or with Shri Basudev Das, penalties have been imposed upon them based upon the above statement of the coaccused Shri Basudev Das, which is not corroborated by any independent evidences. It is well settled law that uncorroborated statement of the co-accused cannot be made the sole basis for penalising the appellants. Accordingl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
