TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 819X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... – Thus, case against Appellant-2 of aiding and abetting of smuggling of Vitamin B1 was clearly established as he has dealt with smuggled goods, by undertaking resale after import – Appelant-1 has also in his confessional statement admitted to having undertaken smuggling of Vitamin B1 and tetracycline hydro chloride under cover of paraffin wax – Therefore, imposition of penalty on Appellat-1 and appellant-2 under Section 112(a) cannot be faulted at all – Decided against Appellant. - C/464 & 516/2006-Mum - Final Order Nos. A/1556-1557/2014-WZB/C-I(CSTB) - Dated:- 25-9-2014 - Shri P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (T) and Ramesh Nair, Member (J) Shri Mayur Shroff, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Ahibaran, Addl. Comm. (AR), for the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n his statement dated 9-6-2000 Shri Kaushik G. Pandya also admitted to knowing Shri Shaikh Anwar Shaikh Ismail and dealing in purchase and sale of Vitamin B-1 without any documents. Thereafter, a show cause notice, dated 30-11-2000 was issued proposing to impose penalties on both the above parties for aiding and abetting of smuggling of Vitamin B-1 by M/s. Plus Point Enterprises. The said notice was adjudicated vide the impugned order and penalties were imposed. Aggrieved of the same, the appellants are before us. 3. None represented Shri Shaikh Anwar Shaikh Ismail despite notice. On the previous four occasions were also none represented Shri Shaikh Anwar Shaikh Ismail. Shri Kaushik G. Pandya was represented by Shri Mayur Shroff, Advocat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngs under the Customs Act. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. 5.1 As regards Shri Kaushik G. Pandya, he was arrested by the DRI on 9-6-2000 and produced before the Magistrate who remanded him to judicial custody. Before the Magistrate, Shri Kaushik G. Pandya has not made any allegations of duress, threat or coercion by the DRI officers. Therefore, the retraction statement dated 12-6-2000, when he was in judicial custody, is only an after-thought. We further notice that in the retraction statement, he has made the allegation that during obtaining my statements, the officers did not ask me about any facts and dictated the entire statement, after dictating the said statement I was asked by the said o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er-thought. It is a settled position that confessional statements recorded by the custom officer is a valid piece of evidence for the proceedings under the Customs Act. Thus, the case against Shri Kaushik G. Pandya of aiding and abetting of smuggling of Vitamin B1 is clearly established as he has dealt with the smuggled goods, by undertaking resale after import. Therefore, penalty is correctly imposable under the provisions of Sections 112(a) 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. 5.2 As regards the allegation of abetment by Shri Anwar Shaikh, he has also in his confessional statement admitted to having undertaken smuggling of Vitamin B1 and tetracycline hydro chloride under the cover of paraffin wax. He has also admitted to importing these ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
