TMI Blog2003 (7) TMI 621X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. In this appeal, the appellants have questioned the validity of the impugned order-in-original, dated 16-10-2001 vide which the Commissioner of Customs has appropriated the security amount of Rs. 50,000/- of the appellants which they furnished for the provisional release of the truck in question. 2. The learned Counsel has contended that there is no evidence on the record to sugge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usal of the record shows that the truck in question bearing No. UP-22/A-8926 was intercepted by Kotwali Police of Rampur on 31-7-2000. The truck was carrying Hajmola which was imported from Nepal and the consignee of those goods was Dabur Ltd. These goods were cleared through a Bill of Entry dated 16-7-2000, by the LCS Raxaul. However, when the police intercepted the truck, it allegedly also conta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould be legally raised. 5. That being so, no seizure of the truck under Section 115 could be ordered. Apart from this, the appellants are only financers of the truck and not the owner. They furnished the security for the provisional release of the truck having interest therein. But there is nothing on the record to suggest if they were called upon to produce the truck for actual confiscation and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
