2009 (7) TMI 970

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. 2. Both the Appeals are filed against a common impugned Order, therefore, are being taken up together. 3. The Appellants filed these Appeals against the impugned Order whereby metal scraps of 792 Kgs. were confiscated on the ground that the same were smuggled into India. The vehicle from which the impugned goods were seized was also confiscated. 4. Contention of the Appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s going to Kolkata, being produced either by the driver or by the other occupant of the truck. It was only on 2-5-07, the Appellants claimed ownership of the goods in question, i.e. after almost 15 days. The contention is that as the Appellants could not produce any evidence in respect of lawful procurement of the goods, therefore the same were rightly confiscated. 6. The issue involved in these .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X