2004 (2) TMI 439

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Heard both sides. It is the case of the appellants that she was the owner of the vessel in which smuggled goods were found but since she had no knowledge of the smuggling, the vessel should not have been confiscated. Reliance is also placed on the finding of the Adjudicating Commissioner that the appellant was not found liable for penalty. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellants al .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wledge and consent of master of the vessel. He also draws attention to the provision of Section 115(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 justifying confiscation of the vessel. 3. After hearing both sides and perusal of case records, I find that Section 115(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 provides that any conveyance used in the smuggling of any goods or in the carriage of any smuggled goods shall be liable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X