TMI Blog1999 (7) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruck No. WB-03/9011 on 26-9-1996, which was detained at the Naubatpur Trade Tax Check post by the Trade Tax Authorities. The goods were booked, as per consignment notes, as Rebooking Readymade goods by one M/s. Gopal Bhai from Calcutta to self at Seroli (Surat). The officers seized the said goods under customs Act alongwith Miscellaneous Indian Goods valued at Rs. 2,79,561/- and the Truck under the reasonable belief that silk yarn was smuggled into the country; Indian goods were used for concealing the same and truck was used as means of transportation. The Commissioner of Customs, under the impugned order confiscated absolutely the raw silk yarn of Chinese origin; confiscated Indian goods with an option to redeem the same on payment of fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of transport company; that Krishna Gopal is liable to penalty as he is concerned in the sale of smuggled silk yarn at Surat in full knowledge; Jayantilal Heera Lal Jariwala had gone to collect the goods in full knowledge and awareness. 3. Shri K.M. Makwana, ld. Consultant, submitted on behalf of M/s. Rajdoot Road Carriers and Rajdoot Road Carriers Pvt. Ltd. that they are engaged in business of transportation of goods; that the consignment received by them for transportation are not opened by them; that it is also not possible to open the packages; that nowhere such practice prevails and as such the Commissioner has wrongly held about their involvement in the case; that the normal trade practice is to accept the goods for transport on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner of Customs, - 1999 (107) E.L.T. 503 (T) wherein it was held that where the nexus was not established between the owner of the contraband and the owner of the goods used for concealment, there was no cause for confiscation of the latter under Section 119 of the Customs Act. 4. Countering the arguments Shri Y.R. Kilania, ld. D.R. reiterated the findings of the Commissioner as contained in the impugned order and emphasised the fact that driver of the truck ran away from the scene which shows his knowledge about the contraband goods being carried on in the truck. 5. I have gone through the submissions of both the sides. The Commissioner has imposed penalty and ordered confiscation of Indian goods as driver of the truck fled away from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide the penalty imposed on M/s. Rajdoot Road Carrier Pvt. Ltd. 6. As per the provisions of Section 115(2) of the Customs Act any conveyance used as a means for the transporting smuggled goods is liable for confiscation unless the owner of the conveyance proves that the conveyance was used as a means of transport in the smuggling of any goods without his knowledge or connivance or knowledge or connivance of his agent and the person in charge of the conveyance. The mere fact that the driver had run away from the place of interception of the truck will not be sufficient to come to a conclusion that he had the knowledge about the contraband goods being carried in the truck. He had also deposed, in his statement 13-11-1996, that he ran away fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
