9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 910X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll probability the appellant is the owner of the goods as the currency has been recovered from his possession on 08.12.2004. Further, the absolute confiscation has been done by the adjudicating authority holding that the appellant is not the owner of the goods is incorrect in the light of the findings here-in above. Therefore, in these circumstances, I hold that the absolute confiscation of the currency is not warranted. Accordingly, I hold that the Indian currency can be released to the appellant on imposition of redemption fine and penalty - appellant has suffered for 9 ½ years and the quantum of currency is about ₹ 24 lakhs which was seized on 08.12.2004 and also has made expenses on litigations to get the currency released therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant is before us. 2.1. The matter was referred to the Larger Bench of this Tribunal to decide the issue that in case a person attempted to export Indian currency outside India without permission of RBI more than ₹ 5000/- and ₹ 10,000/-, in that case whether absolute confiscation is correct or Indian currency can be redeemed by imposition of redemption fine and penalty. The said reference has been answered by the Larger Bench of this Tribunal holding that in case a person attempted to export Indian currency outside India without permission of RBI more than ₹ 5000/- or ₹ 10,000/- in that case the Indian currency can be absolutely confiscated and it is discretion of the proper officer in the facts and circumstances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounsel and submits that although the appellant in his statement on 02.05.2005 has admitted that the currency belongs to him but he has failed to prove that how he has acquired the currency whatever he has stated is fabricated. Therefore, the adjudicating authority has rightly held that the currency neither belongs to the appellant nor he is owner of the same. 6. Considered the submissions made by both sides. 7. The general principle is that on whose possession the goods are found then that person is to be owner of the goods. In this case, the currency has been recovered from the possession of the appellant and the appellant claims the owner of the goods and the adjudicating authority is holding that he is not the owner of the goods. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
