9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1093X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and intent of section 11 of the Customs Act, 1962 was burried causing prejudice to the interest of customs without bringing the members of smuggling racket to the fold of law. When the investigating authority as well as adjudicating authority failed in their duty to bring necessary parties to the fold of law, it is not possible at appellate stage to implead them and press them to undergo trial. M/s. Caravel Shipping Services Pte. Ltd. was neither issued show cause notice nor was adjudicated. There appears lapse on the part of adjudicating authority to keep this concern out of purview of adjudication. No efforts were made by investigation to identify the members of the smuggling racket. Authority failed to conduct overseas enquiry against the racket and no thorough investigation was made into the affairs of CHA, freight forwarder as well as the consignee and there was only pretence to justice by investigation following an empty formality to pass a superfluous adjudication order. - No doubt there was confiscation. But that is merely a consolation to this country when the racket and mastermind behind that remained in mystery and unidentified. Facts and circumstances of the cases s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gnee named Khader Nainar Jummak Khan of No. 11, Keela Pallivasal Street, Illayankudi PO and Taluk, Sivaganga Dist. - 630702 and the goods in container No. TTNU 2633834 was consigned by one Fakir Mohamed from the same port to the consignee Arunachalam Muthukrishnan of No. 3/58, Melappatu PO, Aranthangi, Melappatu Taluk, Pudukottai Dist. - 674616. 3.1 When physical inventory of the container No. TTNU 3803555 was taken as against 148 packages of house hold goods declared, 269 undeclared packages were recovered therefrom. Thus there was excess of 121 packages in the container. When thorough investigation was made, the excess packages were found to have contained certain food items, toiletries and electronic goods as well as automobile parts. 5 biscuit tins were also there. Such tins contained 766 packets of cubic zirconium of 2,76,490 pieces valued at ₹ 1,26,17,100/- by the Jewellery Appraiser of Customs House. All such goods were seized being unclaimed and confiscated not being declared. 3.2 The consignee Khader Nainar Jummak Khan claimed his personal effects pleading his innocence about undeclared goods. His personal effects were not seized but handed over to him. Investi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udication made in adjudication order No. 8615/2009 dated 25.2.2009 is concerned the background of the case is that 148 packages declaring to be personal effects were consigned by one Shri Fakir Mohamed from Malaysia to India in container No. TTNU 2633834 in the name of a consignee Arunachalam Muthukrishnan. The declaration became false when investigation was made into the container on 30.6.2008. Investigation found that there were 358 packages in the container and two packages were biscuit tins concealing 725 packets containing 3,42,100 cubic zirconium valued at ₹ 1,54,76,000/- by the Jewellery Appraiser of Customs. This racket operated in similar manner which was involved in adjudication order No. 8585/2009 dated 18.2.2009. 4.2 The story revealed by the passenger consignee above was that one Fakir Mohamed being his friend in Malaysia was asked by him to send back his (consignees) personal effects in 148 packages when he left Malaysia. Investigation did not bring out any other aspect when they examined him on 1.7.2008. He simply pleaded his innocence and the burden was left to the investigation to prove the identity of the mastermind. 5.1 M/s. Caravel Shipping Services ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of law finding no complicity of them with the smuggling racket. 7.2 Revenue not only failed to produce investigation record today, but also failed to produce the statements recorded from different persons under section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 for scrutiny. 7.3 It is surprising that even reading of para 8 of the show cause notice does not reveal any incriminating evidence against M/s. Carvel Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. Therefore, in absence of justifiable ground by Revenue in its appeal, it is very difficult at this stage to implead M/s. Carvel Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. as respondent. Therefore, Revenues appeal against M/s. Carvel Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. is dismissed. But it does not mean to say that there was no smuggling racket operated to occasion export of the smuggled zirconia into India from Malaysia by a premeditated design. 7.4 It is certainly a truth that there was a smuggling racket operated to bring cubic zirconium into India. It is also shocking to note that there was a total failure of investigation to conduct proper investigation in India and overseas. Spirit and intent of section 11 of the Customs Act, 1962 was burried causing prejudice to the intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
