2001 (4) TMI 314

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent. [Order]. - The appeal is against the order of the Commissioner imposing on the appellant a penalty of Rs. 2.50 lakhs under Section 112(a) of the Act. 2.  The facts which are not in dispute are these. The appellant travelled from Delhi to Bombay on 31-7-1995 by flight IC 184 of Indian Airlines. When the flight landed at Bombay, officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligenc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y to Delhi on the morning of 30-7-1995 and take a specific flight back to Bombay and during that flight recover the currency. 4. On these facts the Commissioner has found the foreign currency liable to confiscation and the appellant liable to penalty. The confiscation of the currency is not questioned before me. The only issue for consideration is the penalty imposed on the appellant. 5.&em .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the currency liable to confiscation. No penalty is hence imposable under Section 112(a) of the Act. 6. The departmental representative contends that since confiscation of the currency, which he says was found from the appellant, is not challenged, clause (a) of Section 112 would apply. 7. I am completely unable to accept this argument. Even assuming that the currency was found from the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X