Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 331 - CESTAT KOLKATAPenalty imposed on the Respondents under Section 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962, dropped - It was alleged that the Respondents had admitted to have been involved in several smuggling activities including the one seized on 09.06.2019 - statement recorded before the Customs official is a statement recorded under section 161 of the Criminal Procure Code, or not - evidence collected by the Customs officials under section 108 of the Customs Act - existence of corroborative evidence or not - retraction of statements - Monetary amount involved in the appeal. Maintainability of appeal - Monetary amount involved in the appeal - HELD THAT:- In view of instructions issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Excise & Customs F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17.12.2015, the revenue involved in the Appeals are nil as Commissioner(Appeals) has not imposed any penalty on the Respondents, therefore, Appeals are not maintainable before this Tribunal. On merits also, it is found that except the statements recorded by the DRI dated 10.06.2019 and 11.06.2019 which were retracted by the Respondents on the first opportunity available on 12.06.2019 before the Ld.CMM, Kolkata, no other corroborative evidence has been brought on record. In that circumstances penalty on the Respondents are not imposable. In the case of Surjeet Singh Chhabra [1996 (10) TMI 106 - SUPREME COURT] there was an evidence of recovery of gold in the possession of the accused apart from the statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. In that circumstances, the decision is not applicable. The Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has rightly dropped the penalty against the Respondents as there is no corroborative evidence on record in support of the statement made before DRI Officers which were retracted on first available opportunity before the Ld.CMM and no cross-examination of any witness has been granted to the Respondents - Appeal of Revenue dismissed.
|