9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (11) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en up for hearing. 2. The present appeals are filed against the orders passed by the Collector of Customs. In terms of the impugned order a penalty of Rs. 5.00 lakhs was imposed on K.P. Rajesh the appellant. The appellant V.P. Manzoor was exonerated from the penalty. However a quantity of 9332.418 kg. silver and the vehicle belonging to the appellant V.P. Manzoor were confiscated under Section 115 of the Customs Act. 3. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant K.P. Rajesh, pointed out that there is absolutely no evidence to show that he carried the silver bars in question in the vehicle with the knowledge that they were smuggled goods. He pointed out that in the impugned order the basis for having knowledge to this appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll be liable for confiscation unless the owner of the conveyance proves that it was so used without the knowledge or connivance of the owner himself, his agent, if any, and the person in charge of the conveyance. Therefore he stated that even though the owner was not in the knowledge of the carrying of the goods in question in the van, the person who is in charge of the conveyance i.e. the driver K.P. Rajesh know about the same and therefore there is a char liability under Section 115 of the Customs Act which is not discharged in this case. Therefore the absolute confiscation is valid. 6. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The point that arises for our determination is whether K.P. Rajesh is liable to penalty. In th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erned in this regard. This statement is not shown to be in any way not voluntary. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court it is for him to lay some basis to hold that this was a statement which is not voluntary in character. There are absolutely no circumstances to show that this statement which is given by him is not voluntary. In such circumstances the adjudicating authority is right in holding that he had knowledge about the smuggled character of the goods which were put in the vehicle in question and is absolutely liable to penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act. However we take note of the fact that he is only a Driver employed by his owner and some other parties who are the beneficiaries have loaded the silver in question. In su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his concurrence. Therefore it is inferred that Shri V.P. Mansoor has had no role, either directly or indirectly, in the subject smuggling of silver ingots. Therefore, I drop the charges against him.". It is thus seen that the adjudicating authority has come to the conclusion that no specific charges are made against Manzoor the appellant and no charge is proved against him also. However his Driver K.P. Rajesh was in the knowledge of the smuggled character of the goods and actually he has transported the same. Therefore the vehicle though confiscable, the absolute confiscation of the same is not warranted in the circumstances of this case. The value of the tempo in question is Rs. 2,25,000/- and taking into consideration the value of the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
