9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 1161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of security deposit of Rs. 2 Lakhs which was deposited by the Late Shri Ishwar Chand Gupta, towards provisional release of the consignment. The Department cannot retain this amount. The Appellant s successor would be eligible to get the refund of security deposit of Rs. 2 Lakhs. Appeal disposed off. - HON BLE MR. R. MURALIDHAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And HON BLE MR. RAJEEV TANDON, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) None for the Appellant Mr. S. Debnath, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER R. MURALIDHAR : Shri Ishwar Chand Gupta was the proprietor of M/s Himalyan Roadways India located at New Delhi. Truck No. NA 3KHA 6351 belonging to Himalayan Roadways was intercepted by Nepali Customs authorities. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as no documents have been relied on by the department or produced during hearing to prove that seizure. Ld. Adjudicator has mainly punished the Father-Son duo on that basis when he reasoned that both have played their role in sending he consignment of Red Sanders Wood illegally to Nepal. It is also on record that it was father-Sonduo who provided the addresses of person/firm which booked the prohibited consignment on their own efforts to provetheir bona-fide but the department could not conduct follow up at those address even today as is clear from impugned order itself. The basis that other persons/notices did not appear cannot be a basis for penalties under Section 114 of Customs Act which require mens-rea. The facts clearly suggest that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aside the penalties imposed on the present Appellant and other Appellants, and also has set aside the confiscation of truck. No Appeal has been filed by the Revenue against this OIA. The present Appeal has been filed by Shri Ishwar Chand Gupta, Proprietor of Himalaya Roadways on the ground that his goods valued at Rs.20,12,150/- were provisionally released against the Security Deposit of Rs. 2 lakhs made by him. Since the Commissioner (Appeals) has fully set aside the OIO and has held that no penalty and confiscation of truck are warranted and set aside the same, the Appellant is required to get back the security deposit of Rs. 2 Lakhs paid by him when the goods were provisionally released. 3. Mr. Dinesh Gupta, son of the Appellant (Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
