9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (3) TMI 290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8377; 2,000/- under Section 112 of the Act. 2. On information, the Superintendent of Central Excise, Central Intelligence Unit, Madurai, with his staff conducted a raid on 1-12-1981 at about 1 P.M. in room No. 20, at Gurny Lodge, Madurai, and recovered Indian currency of ₹ 49,950/- and two incriminating documents from one Noohu, Sri Lankan national with whom there were two other occupants also in the room. Examination and investigation revealed that the currency seized represented the sale proceeds of nahanam of Ceylonese origin, smuggled into India. The said Noohy led the authorities to the appellant s business premises (C.M. Ponnusamy Nadar and Bros., 266, East Masi Street, Madurai). The authorities consequently searched the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on to account for the possession of snail tongues which are also available in India. (4) Reliance cannot be placed on the statements recorded from Noohu since the same was not true and voluntary. The learned counsel also relied on certain authorities which I shall advert to at the relevant place. 4. The learned SDR submitted that Noohu, after examination, pointed out the business premises of the appellant wherefrom snail tongues under concealment were recovered. Apart from it, the appellant himself gave an inculpatory statement before the authorities admitting purchase of smuggled snail tongues (nahanam). A part of the consignment of the smuggled nahanam was also despatched by appellant under fictitious label as kungilium for w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reason as to why the appellant did not choose to make any complaint to the Judicial Magistrate at the time of remand. Having regard to the dictum that official acts are correctly and regularly performed, coupled with the absence of complaint by the appellant of threat and coercion by the Central Excise authorities before the Magistrate, I am not inclined to attach much weight to the retraction of the appellant. It should be noted in this context that a part of the consignment was sought to be despatched under a fictitious name kungilium . The only explanation offered by the appellant is that his employees had erroneously despatched two bags of nahanam instead of two bags of kungilium and this explanation is far from convincing. It is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcumstances of this case the Department has discharged the onus cast on it under law. The above rulings would not be applicable to the facts of this appeal because in the instant case the Department did not rest its case exclusively on the failure of the appellant to account for the goods or on the falsity of the defence version, but took the same as one of the circumstances against the appellant. It is equally settled proposition of law that even in a situation where the presumption under Section 123 in favour of the Department is not available, the onus cast on the Department to prove the foreign origin and the smuggled nature of the goods can be discharged from various circumstances as well. In the instant case, the appellant came forwar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
