9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00/- under Section 112 of the Customs Act on account of seizure of 8 foreign marked gold biscuits weighing 116 tolas from him by the police officers of Katni Police Station which were later on handed over by the police to the Customs Officers. 2. On recovery of 8 gold biscuits of foreign origin from the possession of the appellant, he was served with the show cause notice for confiscation of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were dropped. 2. Learned Counsel has contended that there is no evidence to prove the smuggled character of the seized gold biscuits and as such, no penalty could be imposed on the appellant. The burden of proving that the gold biscuits were smuggled into India was on the Department; but the Department has failed to discharge the same. The learned Counsel placed reliance in this regard on the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority in this regard on any grounds. Therefore, the ratio of the law laid down in R. Ramesh v. Collector of Customs (supra) that the initial burden always rests on the Department to prove the smuggled character of the goods where the goods are not prohibited/notified under Section 123 or Chapter IV-A of the Act, is of not any help to the appellant, when he himself admitted the smuggled character o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct the validity of the order of the adjudicating authority or of the first appellate authority. No prejudice can be said to have been caused on that score to the appellant. More over, when Section 112 itself has been mentioned, it was not essential further to record the specific clause of that Section for imposing penalty on the appellant as that Section relates to the imposition of penalty in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
