TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (5) TMI 555
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arma, Member (T)]. - This is an appeal filed by Shri Harish Kumar against imposition of penalty of Rs. 15,00,000/-. 2.  The facts of the case briefly stated are that the DRI Officers on 7-5-99 visited the business premises of M/s. Indore Goods Carrier, Shastri Nagar, Delhi and recovered 170 packages which had arrived from Indore. The consignee of these packages was M/s. Shalimar Motors, De....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...." and 195 pcs. of suitcases of various sizes of Chinese origin. As the person who had come to take delivery of the goods, could not produce requisite documents for legal import of the goods, the goods were seized. The goods valued at Rs. 57,61,000/- were seized along with the truck. Show Cause Notices were issued to the appellant along with others asking them to explain as to why the goods should ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s were received by their company in the ordinary course of business; that they had no means to know that the goods were of smuggled nature. Ld. Counsel submitted that the statements given against the appellant were only given by people who wanted to implicate him. He submits that those persons whose statement implicated his client were not offered for cross-examination. Ld. Counsels, therefore, su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r transport from Indore to Delhi. He, therefore, submits that imposition of penalty was warranted and that penalty looking to the value of the goods was nominal. 6. We have heard the rival submissions. We have also perused the evidence on record. We note that in the instant case that Shri Harish Kumar is a partner in the transport company. We note that the goods were packed in jute bags. The....