9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inivas, A.R. for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per: M.V.RAVINDRAN] This appeal is directed against order-in-original No. 19/08 dated 10/12/2008. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. On perusal of the records, it transpires that the appellant herein was apprehended and the officers of DRI Hyderabad regional unit detained an olive green coloured synthetic suitcase ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re seized are liable for confiscation and upheld the same but remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority for considering the redemption of the said Indian and foreign, currency and upheld the penalty imposed on the appellant. In the impugned order which is passed in de novo adjudication, the adjudicating authority has come to conclusion that the Indian and foreign cur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the Tribunal in the case of Ivan Leslie Anthony Pinto Vs CC Airport (Mum) [2017-TIOL-70-CESTAT-Mum] had held that Indian currency is not prohibited goods therefore adjudicating authority is bound to allow redemption to the person from whom it was seized. 4. Learned DR reiterates the findings of the lower authority. 5. On a careful consideration of the submissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that the provisions of Section 125 read holistically is very clear; in the case of goods which are not prohibited the adjudicating authority shall give the owner of the goods or the person from whom the said goods were seized, an option to pay a fine in lieu of confiscation, while the said section does not provide or mandate the adjudicating authority in respect of the prohibited goods.&n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
