9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant should be given option of redemption against payment of fine and accordingly directed the original authority to determine a reasonable redemption fine to be paid by the party for redeeming the goods. In the present application, it is submitted by the Chief Commissioner that the goods had been disposed of during the pendency of the appeal, more precisely, in February, 2002 and, therefore, the final order requires to be modified so as to enable the original authority to appropriate the redemption fine from the sale proceeds of the goods and release the balance amount to the party. Learned SDR has reiterated this contention of the applicant. It is not disputed by learned counsel for the party that the goods had been dispose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal against confiscation etc. under the Customs Act shall not be alienated by the Department during the pendency of the appeal. Nevertheless, we are allowing the application for the ends of justice. 3. In the result, we allow the application and substitute the following text for the present text of Final Order No. 498/07 dated 9-5-2007 (in Appeal No. C/23/2007) :- "The appellant was intercepted by officers of Customs on 18-8-1993 in the presence of independent witnesses whereupon he was found to be in possession of two gold cut pieces of foreign origin weighing 74.9 gms. and Indian currencies of the value of Rs. 45,000/-. Subsequent search of his residential premises yielded three gold biscuits of foreign origin weighing 347.8 gms. a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r authorities. It is absolutely clear that the appellant failed to discharge his burden of proof of licit acquisition and possession of the contraband. In the circumstances, confiscation of the goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act has to be sustained. However, the plea of the appellant for option of redemption of the goods requires to be favourably considered. In this connection, learned counsel for the appellant has cited certain precedents. It has also been submitted by both sides that the goods had been disposed of in auction by the department in February, 2002 during the pendency of the appeal. Learned counsel has prayed for release of the sale proceeds after deduction of the dues. It is also submitted that the penalty amount w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame effect in the case of K. Kuttiyandi. The case law is applicable to the facts of the present case. However, now that the department has already disposed of the goods and collected sale proceeds, we are of the view that a reasonable amount of fine can be realised out of the sale proceeds and the balance amount should be released to the party. Contextually, we note that we have taken similar decision in certain earlier cases. For instance, Misc. Order No. 384/07 dated 9-5-2007 in Appeal No. C/163/2000 (K.N. Thiyagarajan) and Misc. Order No. 568/07 dated 21-6-2007 in Appeal No. C/160/2000 (K. Baluchamy) In the result, the original authority should determine the redemption fine to be paid in lieu of confiscation of the said goods. This sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
