9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 450X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner passed the following order :- 5. I have carefully gone through the case records and submissions made before me. I have also perused the Case Law placed on record by the Appellant. I find that there is no dispute that the Appellant was carrying U.S. $ 12,316, Pound Sterling 310 and Indian Currency Rs. 1,02,055/- in excess of the permissible limit as provided under Regulation 7(4) of the Foreign Exchange Management (Export and Import of Currency) Regulations, 2000. However, I observe that Appellant has produced proof with regard to import of Foreign Currency at the time of his arrival and also with regard to recovered Indian Currency. The Department after due verification has accepted the explanation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of Personal Penalty imposed on the Appellant to Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only). The balance amount of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) deposited as Personal Penalty is ordered to be adjusted against the payment of Redemption Fine. (Emphasis supplied.) 3. It is to be noted that Commissioner had allowed redemption of the confiscated currency on payment of a fine of Rs. 1.75 lakh. Meantime, the appellant had returned to England. He and his legal representative wrote many letters to the Customs authorities, requesting that the redemption fine amount be adjusted from the currency under confiscation and the remaining amount returned to him. That request was rejected. 4. Ultimately, the appellant deposited the redempti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d was caused by the unfair attitude of the Customs. 6. There is merit in the appellant s case. To begin with, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) had not fixed any time limit for the redemption of the confiscated currency. Nor did the authorities notify the appellant that the option was to be exercised within any time limit. The appellant had made a fair request for adjustment of the redemption fine amount from the confiscated currency and to return the remaining amount to him. This was not acceded to for no valid reason. Now, the appellant has deposited the redemption fine also. The denial of the return of the confiscated currency would amount to absolute confiscation of the currency which is contrary to the order of the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
