9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 153X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ency, buy and sell. 3. There have been regular transactions between the two FFMCs during the relevant period. The procedure followed by the appellants, for that matter, all FFMCs is, FC is sold to another FFMC against Indian currency when a pay order issued by a bank is tendered across the counter. After verifying the authenticity of the pay order, genuineness of the FFMC (whether licensed by RBI), who tendered it, FC is sold. Hotel Zam Zam Money Changing Division through their representatives presented five pay orders to the appellants totally amounting to Rs. 42,37,750/-, the latter deposited these five pay orders in their current account maintained by them in Karnataka Bank Ltd. on 10-7-1997. The appellants also deposited pay orders am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tainted in any way as it has been regularly obtained from RBI. Another important aspect is that the Indian currency confiscated by the Commissioner was lying in the appellants bank account. It appeared that during the course of investigation the officers of DRI instructed the Banks (Bombay Mercantile Co-op. Bank and Karnataka Bank) to deposit the said amounts with the Commissioner of Customs in favour of Government of India as the said amounts represented sale proceeds of smuggled FC and is therefore liable to confiscation under Section 121 of the Customs Act. 5. Heard both sides. 6. The Commissioner in his order says that the said amounts represented sale proceeds as they are lying in the accounts maintained by Hotel Zam Zam Money Chan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave become a subject matter of appeal before us, in this case the transaction is complete and the remuneration for sale of foreign cunency has come into the account of the appellants. The appellants therefore have a legitimate claim over the money confiscated from their accounts. 8. While dealing with the appeal in the case of B.P. Nayak v. CC (P), Mumbai [2001 (136) E.L.T. 604 (T)], the Tribunal held that it would lead to absurd results if monies are confiscated under Section 121 of the Customs Act even in genuine transaction holding that at sometime in the past the monies involved were tainted. Para 28 of this order refers. 9. In view of the discussions above, we hold that the amounts, seized and later confiscated, cannot be considere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
