9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (12) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon hearing the arguments of Mr. P. Kadirvel for Mr. S. Ganesan Advocate for the petitioner and Respondent not appearing in person or by Advocate, the Court made the following order :- This criminal revision case is filed by the accused. He has been convicted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, under Section 135(1)(b)(i) of the Customs Act and sentenced to one year R.I. and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, read with Section 3 of Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 and as such he is punishable under Section 135(1)(b)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. The accused denied the charge. On the appreciation of the evidence adduced in the case, the learned trial Magistrate came to the conclusion that the accused was guilty and therefore he convicted and sentenced him ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar that he was aware that foreign goods had been brought to his house. As pointed out by the Court below, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to show that there was any permit in respect of the said foreign goods, or any duty had been paid for them. The accused should have known that they are liable for confiscation. In these circumstances, under Section 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act, even k ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
