9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (6) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s judgment and order dated 19th October, 1977 ordered the confiscation of, among other things, two zoom lenses under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act. Similarly he also ordered the confiscation of 12 rolls of gilletin filters under the same provision of law. The Assistant Collector also imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on the petitioner's husband and a penalty of equal amount on the petitioner under Section 112 of the Customs Act. This was naturally without prejudice to any other action that could be taken under the Customs Act. This order was appealed against by both the petitioner and her husband. The Central Board of Excise and Customs by its order dated 28th September, 1979 modified the order of the first authority by setting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the peititioner. The proceedings under the Customs Act, even the departmental proceedings, are in the nature of penal proceedings and, therefore, the burden of proving its case is always upon the Department except where Section 123 of the Customs Act is attracted. The three authorities below in this case have held that the goods in question are not covered by the provisions of Section 123 of the Customs Act. Therefore, one must proceed on the basis as to whether the Department has discharged the burden which rests upon it before calling upon the petitioner to disprove the Department's case. 4. In so far as the zoom lenses are concerned, the petitioner has produced two receipts under which she has purchased the same for consideration. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e earliest statement recorded by them that the said goods which had been already taken in custody by the authorities bore chalk mark which was an indication that they were allowed to be cleared by the customs authorities. The petitioner also relied upon a public notice bearing No. 13 ITC(PN)/71 dated 1st February, 1971 which dealt with the import of goods as personal baggage under the Baggage Rules. The decision of the Government has been mentioned in this notice and that is that a passenger normally resident in India and returning from abroad from any country other than Ceylon, Pakistan or Nepal after a stay for a period of less than three months abroad may be allowed to import duty free and without I.T.C. formalities articles up to a valu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt and order dated 28th September, 1978 acquitted both of them. It is true that in the said proceedings the Department relied practically only on Section 123 of the Customs Act. As I have already held above, the provisions of Section 123 have been found to be inapplicable to the goods which were seized from the petitioner's house. The appeal against the order of acquittal preferred by the State has been summarily dismissed by this Court. 9. Considering all these facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the opinion that the orders passed by the authorities below deserve to be set aside. 10. In the result, this petition is allowed. The orders of all the three authorities below are set aside and the proceedings held against the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
