9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of the Additional Collector of Customs (Preventive) (164/92) in which he has held that penalty not to be imposable on Choksi and remanding the matter to him for readjudication. 2.Patel Madhavlal Maganlal Company, is a firm of angadias. That is, they transport goods and money on behalf of various persons for a fee. The search of its premises resulted in seizure of inter alia Indian currency of Rs. 24,64,629/- and some documents. Study of the documents revealed that various persons had kept money with the angadias. The partners of the firm stated in their statement that they conduct transport of diamonds from one place to another on behalf of diamond traders and also exchanges sums of money. Department's investigation also took it to Ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of evidence that the Additional Collector has relied upon. 5.We will first consider the liability to confiscation of the currency. The Collector (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal against the confiscation on the ground that the facts of the case indicate "the nature of the seized currency" and Jayantibhai I. Prajapati and Ramesh L. Prajapati, the employees of the firm in their statements admitted that the currency was the sale proceeds of smuggled goods. The Additional Collector has gone into considerable details. He narrates the statements of the partners of the firm, which we have already referred to. He says that Jayantibhai I. Prajapati and Ramesh L. Prajapati, their accountants, say with reference to the accounts that the firm main ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... countants that the money was brought by "private bankers" who handled the money of smugglers can hardly justify this conclusion. The question will arise how these persons came to this knowledge of "private bankers" handles the money of smugglers known. Not a single fresh evidence is cited to indicate what the smuggled goods were, how much their quantity, who sold them to whom etc. There is in short a total lack of evidence to justify the confiscation of the currency. 8.We will now turn to the appeal of Chandrakumar Amichand Choksi. The Additional Collector has not advanced any reason for not imposing any penalty under Section 112 of the Act and contravention of the provisions of Section 111 of the Act had not been brought out. The Collect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gument has not been raised. 9.It is in any case not necessary to consider it. There is nothing to show that the currency of Rs. 5.85 lacs that Chandrakumar Amichand Choksi deposited with the angadia was the sale proceeds of smuggled goods. His statement is that he used to deposit the cash as per instructions; that his main business was dealing in silver and hawala payment is made against the smuggled goods. No doubt he says that he was involved in three cases earlier and he was detained under COFEPOSA twice. However, this currency does not satisfy the requirement laid down in the decision that we have cited above. There are no details whatsoever of the silver or any other goods which are stated to have been smuggled or sale as a result of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
