9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 628X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed case of illegal export of foreign currency from India by concealing the same in baggage and considering the substantial quantum of currency seized, the discretion ought not be exercised so as to allow release of the same by paying redemption fine, then, this is not a case of any perversity or an error of law apparent on the face of the record. Rather, this is a case where the prohibited act was rightly dealt with. This is not a case where any other provision but section 113 could be applied. In the facts peculiar to this case, the invocation and application of section 113 also was permissible. - Decided against the appellant. - Customs Appeal No. 24 of 2015, Notice of Motion No. 2190, 2191 of 2015, Customs Appeal No. 75 of 2015 - - - D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ber of cases even today, the Revenue has been allowing the option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation. There cannot be different yardsticks as between the others who default in compliance with law and the appellant before this Court. 4. He, therefore, submits that the appeals be admitted. 5. We are unable to agree with Mr. Kantawala and for more than one reason. The facts are not in dispute. The two appellants before us smuggled to Hong Kong, foreign currency concealed in their baggage. These persons were deported back from Hong Kong. Upon landing back in India, they were intercepted by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence officials after crossing the green channel on their arrival from Hong Kong. On examination, it was found that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing in force, namely, Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, read with Foreign Exchange Management (Current Account Transaction) Rules, 2000. Once this was the act attributed to these persons, then, it was the discretion of the Adjudicating Authority to allow redemption or to resort to absolute confiscation. The Tribunal once having been apprised of a discretionary power available under section 125 was only required to consider the two submissions canvassed before us by Mr. Kantawala. 8. We find that they have indeed been considered. In the present case, what was attributed to the persons was an act clearly within the meaning of section 113 of the Customs Act, 1962. The foreign currency in this case was attempted to be improperly exporte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this case we find that the contentions as raised before us were specifically raised duly noted and considered by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that once this is an admitted case of illegal export of foreign currency from India by concealing the same in baggage and considering the substantial quantum of currency seized, the discretion ought not be exercised so as to allow release of the same by paying redemption fine, then, this is not a case of any perversity or an error of law apparent on the face of the record. Rather, this is a case where the prohibited act was rightly dealt with. This is not a case where any other provision but section 113 could be applied. In the facts peculiar to this case, the invocation and application of section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
