9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 491X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... habitual offence committed by them. Taking into account, the facts and circumstances of the case, the quantum of penalty is reduced - appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant. - C/357, 358, 360, 361, 367, 368/2009 - FO/A/75170-75175/2017 - Dated:- 27-2-2017 - Shri P.K.Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Arijit Chakraborty, Advocate for the Appellant Shri S.K.Naskar, AC(AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per: Shri P.K.Choudhary 1. The brief facts of the case is that on 08.04.2008 the Customs Officers of Agartala Division in checking/examination of Flight No.IC 7901, detected a consignment containing (i) cigarettes valued at ₹ 27,97,000/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Ninety Seven Thousand Only), shoe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consignee of 18,000 packets of cigarettes, 410 pairs of shoes and 5800 pieces of ladies inner wear of foreign origin. However, redemption fine of ₹ 1,00,000/- was imposed on release of the goods of 410 pairs of shoes and 5800 pieces of ladies inner wear. 2. It is the case of the appellant nos.1,2,3,4 5, they have been named as consignee and the air-way bills were in their names. The contention is that someone might have misused their names. It is the case of the appellant no.6 Shri Praveen Kr. Gupta that he is working as a broker for the said consignee and was not aware of the nature of the goods. He has also contended that he had prayed for the release of the goods even upon payment of redemption fine but the Adjudicating Aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their illegal business under fictitious addresses as they knew that the goods are liable to confiscation and they are liable to penalty under the provisions of the Customs Act 1962. Under the circumstances of the case I am of the view that imposition of penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act 1962 on the consignors whose name/addresses appear on the airway bills will be a futile exercise considering that they are found to be fictitious/untraceable. xxx xxx xxxx xxxx 3.7. Furthermore, it transpires from available records that Shri P.K.Gupta @ Shri Prabeen Kumar Gupta who was the consignee of 18,000 packets of cigarettes, 410 pairs of shoes and 5800 pieces of lady's inner wear under seizure that were being transported u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Santosh Kumar could be traced. I am therefore of the considered view that the circumstantial evidence indicates that Shri Prabeen Kumar Gupta would have been successful in acquiring illegally imported goods for sale at the markets of Kolkata had the same not been intercepted and seized by the Customs Officers at Agartala. 3.8 As regards the other consignees of the cigarettes, i.e. Shri Ajay Tamang, Shri Dharma @ Shri Dharma Das, Shri S.Chakraborty @ Shri Subo Chakraborty and Shri Bivas Das, I find that in the instant case they denied having any knowledge regarding the consignments that were dispatched in their name and the consignors are from Imphal. According to them, though the airway bills reflected their names/addresses as the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring themselves liable to penalty under Section 112 ibid. 5. Brief facts in the case of Shri Prabeen Kumar Gupta are as under : The house of Shri P.K.Gupta @ Shri Prabeen Kumar Gupta situated at 49/5/H/51, K.M.Sarani, Kolkata-23, being the consignee of 12 nos of packages containing 18,000 packets of Cigarettes, 410 pairs of shoes and 5800 pieces of cloths found to be of foreign origin (as mentioned in airway bill 00000945/IMF) was searched by the Rummaging Intelligence officers of Kolkata Customs on 29.04.2008 but no contrabands or documents of incriminating nature were recovered. A statement recorded under Section 108 of Customs Act 1962 was obtained from Mr.P.K.Gupta @ Prabeen Kr. Gupta on 30.04.2008 in which he inter alia st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds. On the other hand, Shri Prabeen Kumar Gupta had not produced any authentic documents in respect of claim of the goods except that his name is mentioned in the Airway bill. I find that in a similar situation, the other appellants (No.1 to 5) above had submitted that their names were being misused as mentioned wrongly in the Airway bill. As the consignors are not traceable and the consignee had not substantiated any evidence in support of his claim of the goods, it may be concluded that the goods are of smuggled nature. So, I agree with the findings of the Adjudicating Authority. In all the case laws, the facts of each case is different from the facts of the present case. In the said case laws, the claimants had produced the documents. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
