TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emand, driver could not produce any duty paying documents for 92 boxes loaded in the said vehicle. After recording the statement of driver and Panchnama, in a follow-up action on 22-11-2000, the officers visited the factory premises of the appellant and conducted further investigation. On conclusion of such investigation, the revenue issued SCN to the appellants directing them to show cause as to why duty should not be demanded on the goods seized and also why the penalties should be imposed on them in addition to confiscation of the said seized goods. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand, imposed penalties and also confiscated the goods and truck with an option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine. On an appeal, Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OD-V, New Delhi (herein after referred to as CEO ) presented ourselves at C-19, DDA, Community Centre, Janak Puri, New Delhi to witness the Central Excise proceedings. The CEO informed us that the staff of preventive branch, MOD-V, New Delhi has while patrolling in the Mayapuri Inds. Area, Phase II, New Delhi intercepted one vehicle Eicher bearing Registration No. OP-80J-9978 loaded with steering wheels. The driver of the vehicle Shri Satinder Kumar, on demand, could not produce any document covering the goods . 6. From the above reproduced portion of the Panchnama of seizure of goods, it can be seen that the Panchnama was drawn by and signed by the Inspector of Central Excise It is very clear that provision of Section 108 of the Customs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The only evidence in that behalf which the prosecution could lead was the statements made by these accused persons before the Customs Officer under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. In this case statements purporting to be of these accused have been produced. Exhs. A to I are the statements of the nine accused person. The Ld Trial Magistrate has held these statements inadmissible in evidence. The ground on which he held them inadmissible was that the statements ought to be recorded by any Gazetted Officer of the Customs and not by others. Inspector Divekar of the Customs has signed below all the nine statements, but his evidence shows that he recorded none of them . 8. The ratio of the Hon ble High Court judgment squarely covers th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
