9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 556X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in terms of notification no. FEMA 6(R)-RB-2015 dated 29.12.2015; the permissible amount of currency of Rs.25,000/- was returned to the appellant and balance of Indian currency of Rs.1,61,500/- and Thai Baht of 8000/- were detained. The same was seized on 02.05.2019. A show cause notice dated 09.05.2019 was issued to the appellant. Vide O-I-O dated 18.11.2019 Assistant Commissioner of Customs confiscated the seized currency and imposed a penalty of Rs. 89,500/- on the appellant under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. On an appeal preferred by the appellants Learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide order in appeal dated 27.01.2021 upheld the order of the lower authority. Hence, this appeal. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2007 (212) E.L.T. 436 (Tri.-Chennai) (iii) Mrs. Suman Budhia (Agarwal) Order dated 01.06.2001 (Tri.-Kolkata) (iv) Vasant Kumar Khakkhar Order dated 27.09.2019 in Customs Appeal Nos. 313, 314/2010 (Tri.-Mumbai) (v) Decision dated 26.09.2013 by High Court of Madras in CMA No. 762/2006 and CMP No. 3035/2006 4. Learned Authorized Representative for the Department reiterates the findings in the Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. He further submits that the issue being related to baggage the appeal should lie before the competent authority and not before the Tribunal. He relies on order of Kerala High Court dated 22.01.2021 in Customs Appeal Nos. 13 and 14 of 2020 and Supreme Court decision in the case of Rajgrow Impex LLP and Ors. in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15. The appellant's contention is that the money was legally procured from his savings; he was not aware of the rules and regulations pertaining to export of currency; when he was intercepted, he truthfully declared the currency available with him; his statement was not recorded immediately; relied upon documents for not provided along with show cause notice. 7. We find that it is not the case of the appellant that he has declared upfront the currency in his position while he was travelling Abroad and the currency he carried was within limits prescribed under the notification. We find that in terms of the Regulation as discussed above Indian Currency over and above Rs.25,000/- is not permissible to be taken outside India. We find that as f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of Section 113 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Section 114 of the Customs Act are attracted. 8. Coming to the issue of allowing redemption of the confiscated goods, we find that the original authority as well as the appellate authority have ordered absolute confiscation of the currency and have imposed penalty under Section 114. We find that learned Authorized Representative relied upon the cases, as cited above, and submits that the goods may not be released on payment of redemption fine. We find that the cases cited therein are not comparable. In the instant case, the issue involves an individual who is travelling Abroad for his personal work. No business dealing are alleged or indicated. It is not the case of the Department that the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
