9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (5) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ritbhai of M/s. M. P. International produced some Bs/E showing clearance of ball bearings and spark plugs. These goods were released. One Bhupatbhai M. Shah whose name was given by the Manager of the warehouse as the depositor of 222 cartons of ball bearings denied ownership of the same but his brother Bharat M. Shah claimed ownership. The book showed the figure of 222 cartons. Shri Bharat M. Shah initially deposed that he deposited 254 cartons but DRI found only 219 cartons. Shri Bharat M. Shah in his later deposition corrected himself and adopted the figure as 222 cartons. He claimed that he had purchased the goods for cash. He was not able to supply details of the sales at all. Shri Harshad Doshi the other appellant claimed to have kept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t goods imported in Calcutta for over-land in bond transit to Nepal were being surreptitiously diverted to Mumbai. This is a general intelligence but no disclosure is made or claimed that it was a specific intelligence. There is no admission by any person concerned that these goods were imported and wrongly diverted. The Commissioner observed that no registers were kept by the warehouse keeper but that only note books entries were maintained. This warehouse was not licensed in terms of Sec. 58 of the Customs Act and therefore, there was no legal requirement for maintenance of specific registers. The Commissioner had also found fault with the claimants in not knowing what cargo they had deposited. 5.It is true that the narration of facts m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nly prohibited goods in terms of Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. They are therefore, liable to confiscation under that Section. I concede that no evidence exists that the said goods have been brought across the land border without payment of duty. I hold, therefore, that the goods are not liable to confiscation under Section (emphasis supplied).111(k) of the Customs Act, 1962." 7.We have earlier noted the intelligence about the diversion of goods. Clandestine import through other borders is not alleged or even hinted. In the face of this observation and the admission, the Commissioner thereafter, proceeded to confiscate the goods under Sec. 111(d) of the Act. His order does not survive. 8.At this stage Shri Sarkar intervenes an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
