9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 118X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals), 3rd Floor, Custom House, 15/1, Strand Road, Kolkata - 700 001. 2. The facts of the case are as that on 07.01.2010 the officers of D.R.I (Directorate of Revenue Intelligence) Kolkata searched the following premises, amongst others:- a) M/s Dilpasand Shop, proprietor Shri Minoo Kumar Hiroo in the AC market, 1 Shakespeare Srani, Kolkata -700071 and residence of Shri Minoo Kumar Hiroo, Flat No. 5C and 10 B Middleton Apartment, 3 Middleton Road, Kolkata 700071. b) Residence of Shri Prakash Kumar Hiroo, brother of Shri Minoo Kumar Hiroo, Flat No. 1F Middleton Apartment, 3 Middleton Road, Kolkata 700071. 2.1. The officers seized certain foreign Whiskey Bottles, crystal Show pieces, Glass wares, Pens, Sunglasses, etc., on the allegatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. g) Imposition of penalty of Rs.26,200/- on Shri Prakash Kumar Hiroo under Section 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. h) Imposition of penalty of Rs.20,000/- on Shri Mukesh Kumar Hiroo under Section 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. 3.2. All the three appellants herein, along with Shri Rajiv Kumar Hiroo, filed appeals before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 3.2.1. Vide the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. KOL/CUS(CCP)/KA/164-166/D/2020 dated 17.08.2020, the Ld. Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), rejected all the appeals of the appellants herein. 3.2.2. However, by Order-In-Appeal No. KOL/CUS(CCP)/Ks/72/2025 dated 18.02.2025, in the appeal of Shri Rajiv Kumar Hiroo, the Ld. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting aside the confiscation of the goods is applicable for their appeals also. Accordingly, the appellants have prayed for setting aside the penalties imposed on them, on the same grounds. 6. The Ld. Authorized Representative of the Revenue reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 7. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 8. I find that a common Show Cause Notice was issued inter alia against the following persons/noticees: - (i) Shri Minoo Kumar Hiroo (ii) Shir Rajiv Kumar Hiroo (iii) Shri Prakash Hiroo (iv) Shri Mukesh Hiroo wherein the goods seized were proposed for confiscation and penalties were also proposed on all the above persons under the Customs Act, 1962, for the same offence. Thereafter, the ld. adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esumptions while seizing the impugned gold. The allegation that the impugned goods is smuggled one is imaginative speculations only having no independent corroboration by way of tangible evidence or independent witness which is unacceptable in law. 17. In view of above, I am of the considered view that the impugned goods are not smuggled ones and thus have wrongly been seized. Therefore, I hold that the proceedings against the appellant are bad in law. Consequently, the confiscation of the impugned goods and imposition of penalty on the appellant is not sustainable, hence are set aside. The appeal is allowed with consequential relief." 8.2. From the above, it is seen that for the appeal filed by Shri Rajiv Kumar Hiroo, the order of confi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
