9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 660X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. - These 3 appeals arise out of a single order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, ACC, Mumbai. The facts being common, these appeals are disposed of vide this single order. 2. M/s. S.R. Shipping Agency, the first appellants were engaged in the business of booking of cargo. Shri Raju Vadilal Gandhi and Shri Sunil Ashok Mehta were partn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... porter Shri Ankush Mhashilkar to Customs but was not present for the discussions. On 26-6-93, the Customs required the presence of Shri Mhashilkar. Both partners of the appellants' firm tried to locate him but Mhashilkar could not be located. On the same date, with the help of the sniffer dog narcotics in the form of mandrex tablets were found concealed in the filing cabinets. Statements were reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been filed. 2. Shri Doiphode, the ld. Counsel for the appellants submits that the conviction of the Commissioner that the present appellants had conspired with Mhashilkar for export of narcotics was not backed by any evidence at all. He submitted that the shipping bill was got passed from Customs by Shri Mhashilkar. Shri Mhashilkar was known to his client. His client merely acted in between ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver 2 years was restored. In view of these facts, Shri Doiphode submits that the appellants deserve total relief. 3. Shri Sarkar arguing for the Revenue reiterates the Commissioner's findings. 4. We have considered the submissions made and have seen the documents. 5. It is not the case of the Customs that the present appellants had handled the consignments of furniture from which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ooting than of CHA. 7. On perusal of the entire evidence and on hearing the Counsel and the DR, we find that there is nothing on record to establish that the present appellants had conspired with the exporter for export of narcotics or that they had knowledge of the contents of the export consignment. In view of this, the orders of penalty imposed upon the present appellants do not survive. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
