Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (6) TMI 60

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he statements made which were retraced. Reasonable belief to seize the currency cannot be based on presumption. Allegations based on assumptions and presumptions have no legs to stand on. The impugned order has not addressed these legal issues satisfactorily. In fact the Order states that the appellants have not put forward any other documentary evidence to prove that they are not involved in the illicit transaction and hence rejects their appeal. This is a very strange situation in which the noticees of a town seizure are held guilty only because of their statements and their not possessing documents to prove their innocence, when the burden of proving the case rests with the department. We are thus hold that the department has not proved .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ly confiscated the Indian currency of Rs.50,91,500/- for allegedly being the sale proceeds of gold under sec. 121 of the Customs Act, 1962; confiscated the three seized cars which were allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine and also imposed penalty on all the the appellants as follows:- S. No. Appellant Penalty imposed 1. Soundararajan Rs.10,00,000/- 2. Senthilvelan Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Gajendran Rs.10,00,000/- 4. Smt. Shanthi Rs.10,000/- 5. Smt. Saravanambal Rs.10,000/- Aggrieved by the adjudication order, the appellants preferred appeals before Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the order impugned herein rejected the appeals, hence the present appeals before this Tribunal. 3. We have heard learned counsel Shri A.V. Arun for the appellants a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing a supporting decision of a High court has affected their defence and the OIO should have been set aside on this score alone. In this case total cash of Rs. 50,91,500/- was seized by police. Senthilvelan alone is claiming ownership of it with suitable explanation, supported by documentary evidence for its origin and possession throughout the proceedings including in the court case. He stated that seizures were made merely on suspicious information, which cannot occupy the place of proof however strong it may be. It was therefore prayed that the Tribunal may set aside the impugned orders of the lower authorities and order the return of seized currency along with the cars and the penalty amounts paid by the appellants and pass suitable ord .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... absence of any material evidence as argued by the concerned parties and their counsels is mitigated by the principle of preponderance of possibilities adopted and recommended by various judicial and appellate forums in deciding cases of this nature unlike the civil cases. Based on the confessional statement coupled with recovery of the sale proceeds and a belated retraction which is nothing but an afterthought. S/Smt. K. Santhi and Saravanambal, have received a part amount of the sale proceeds from the appellant Shri. Senthilvelan, hence the LAA correctly imposed a penalty on the appellants S/Smt.K.Santhi and Saravanambal for their active role in this case. She prayed that the appeals filed by the party may be rejected on merits and render .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... torily. In fact the Order states that the appellants have not put forward any other documentary evidence to prove that they are not involved in the illicit transaction and hence rejects their appeal. This is a very strange situation in which the noticees of a town seizure are held guilty only because of their statements and their not possessing documents to prove their innocence, when the burden of proving the case rests with the department. 7. We find that the Hon ble Madras High Court in Jet Unipex Vs Commissioner of Customs [Appeal Number: W.P. No. 5233 of 2016, dated: 19/05/2020] held as under; 70. As indicated above, adjudication proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962 cannot solely be based on the inculpatory statements of witnesses a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates