Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2010 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (3) TMI 708 - HC - CustomsPenalty – Smuggling – no direct evidence to come to the conclusion that the appellant had involved in lifting packages without clearing from the customs and that the involvement of the appellant has not proved either conducting an identification parade or giving an opportunity for the appellant to cross-examine - witnesses stated that they would identify the person who was taking the consignment in blue color maruthi car - It is not in dispute that the car owned by the wife of the appellant in a blue maruthi car - wife of the appellant has stated that her husband (appellant herein) was using her maruthi car but she was not aware that he was using vehicle for smuggling activities - no necessity for the Department to conduct identification parade since the appellant himself was working in the same place for more than three years and as the witnesses were acquainted with the appellant and that they have identified his photo - appellant was working as a Customs Officer even on the date of the incident and on earlier occasion - application to retract from his statement long after, as rightly held by the Commissioner, it was only an after thought and therefore - Except the appellant and his wife, others have not filed any appeal - They have accepted the penalty levied – No merit in appeal
|