Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2011 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (9) TMI 968 - PATNA HIGH COURTSmuggling of gold - confiscation - penalty - The appellant had shown cause wherein he had in substance stated that he was a mere carrier of contraband gold handed over to him at Raxaul by somebody, which in turn had to be handed over to another person at Benaras - section 108 of the CA - Held that: - It has been held that the statements under section 108 of the Act are in the nature of substantive evidence, and culpability of the concerned persons can be based on the same - the department was able to discharge its primary onus by recording the appellant’s voluntary statement u/s 107 of the Act, read with the appellant’s statement under section 108 of the Act which is in the nature of substantive evidence, with which the onus passed on to the appellant in terms of section 123 of the Act. The appellant has not in the least discharged the onus of proof on him. He admitted recovery of the contraband goods from his person on 20.8.2000. He made different statements at different stages of the proceedings. His defence that it was purchased from Dhan Cholia Sons, Delhi, has been found to be false leading to the irresistible conclusion that it was contraband goods, having been smuggled from a country of third origin - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|