9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocate For the Respondent : None ORDER (Akil Kureshi, CJ) This appeal is filed by the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal to challenge the judgment dated 6th January, 2020. Following questions are presented for our consideration: "(a) Whether the CESTAT correctly interpreted the provision of section 11 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Import Control Order No. 17/55 dated 01-12-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the judgment dated 26.04.2018? (e) Whether the CESTAT correctly interpreted the provision of section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 when the respondent No. 1 had been caught red handed by the CISF officers/staff of Agartala Airport, while respondent No.-1 was carrying 18 Nos. of gold bangles wearing on both of her arms on 23.06.2017? (f) Whether the judgments dated 26.04.2018 & 11.10.2018 pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontents of the said statement with corroborative evidence. In so far it was contended in the said statement that the appellant was frequently travelling by Flights and they are habitual Smugglers. But no verification was conducted in support of the said statement. On the contrary, after analyzing other statements recorded subsequently as stated herein are corroborative with each other. It appears ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Invoices submitted by the appellants with the proper local authorities. In such situation, the seizure of gold bangles worn by the Appellant No.1, cannot be sustained. (12) It is significant to note that the entire case is made out on the basis of statement dated 23.06.2017 of Appellant No.1. The other statements including Appellant No.1's subsequent statement and purchase documen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
