9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 927X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... flight - In the absence of any retraction of the statement, any defence put forth by the learned counsel will not carry their any further - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Appeal(s) Involved: C/31114/2017-SM, C/31115/2017-SM - A/30515-30516/2018 - Dated:- 26-4-2018 - Mr. M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Mr. T. Ankamma Rao Adv for the Appellant. Mr. M. Chandra Bose, A.R. for the Respondent. [Order per: M.V. RAVINDRAN.] These two appeals are directed against order-in-appeal No. VIZ-CUSTM-000-APP-022 23-17-18 dated 31.07.2017. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of records, it transpires that the issue that is being challenged before the bench is whether the penalties i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l after taking the Bench through the entire case records submits that there is no smuggling of the gold as provisions of Section 2(39) of the Customs Act has defined what is smuggling and the goods in the case in hand will not be smuggled goods and consequently provisions of Section 111(d) will not get attracted to goods; that the goods which are seized by the department are of foreign origin has to be proved by the Department and not the appellant. Further it is submitted that the department's assayer has also certified that the goods are not of foreign origin. If that be so, the confiscation of the jewellery is incorrect and preponderance of probabilities are not in favour of the customs authorities when the goods were of Indian ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... khapatnam outside the Airport and he also identified Shri Raparthi Durga Rao as to the person who had given the gold to him travelling in the same flight and it is also undisputed that appellant Shri Sriramdasu Roja Prasada Rao was travelling from Dubai to Visakhapatnam in the same flight via Hyderabad. In the absence of any retraction of the statement, I find that any defence put forth by the learned counsel will not carry their any further. 8. In view of the foregoing I hold that the impugned order of the 1 st Appellate Authority is correct and legal and does not require any interference. The confiscation ordered by the lower authorities is also correct in the facts of this case. Accordingly the appeals are rejected. (order pron ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
