9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Coimbatore on 20-5-2003. They, further, found that the packages were consigned to one Shri S. Chandra Gupta, holder of Indian Passport No. C 23464/02. The goods were found to have been booked as personal effects . As the passenger did not turn up to claim the goods, the goods were detained. On 24-5-2003, the appellant, Shri Sitaram Sashi Chandra Gupta, turned up at the Air Cargo Complex and, in his presence, the packages were opened, whereupon they were found to contain certain foreign origin goods, namely, cigarettes, cell phones, VCD player and assorted clothes. For want of permit or licence for import, the goods were seized under a mahazar under Section 110 of the Customs Act, based on a belief that the goods had been smuggled into In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idence. The present appeal is against his order of adjudication. 4. Ld. Consultant submits that the statement recorded from the appellant on 24-5-2003 under Section 108 of the Customs Act cannot be held against him as it was not signed by any officer of Customs. This submission is contested. Ld. DR submits that the statement dated 24-5-2003 was never retracted and that its authenticity was never questioned by the appellant. It is for the first time in this appeal that the appellant is doubting the authenticity of his statement. Adverting to merits of the case, learned Consultant submits that the appellant has never claimed the goods and is, therefore, not liable to be penalised in relation thereto. The Passport Number shown in the Air Way ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is whether the quantum of penalty imposed on the appellant is reasonable. It appears from the impugned order that the goods have been valued at Rs. 1.30 lakhs and a fine of Rs. 80,000/- has been imposed for redemption of the goods. It has been assertively stated in the appeal memo that the appellant is now disclaiming the goods. He does not want to redeem them. Having regard to the fact that the goods valued at Rs. 1.30 lakhs are becoming the property of the Govt., I am of the view that the penalty should be reduced. Accordingly, the impugned order is sustained with the modification that the penalty on the appellant stands reduced to Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only). The appeal is disposed of. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Cust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
