TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 381X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of vehicles for transporting garlic of Chinese origin is established for which no claimant has come forward and even the drivers also had no document of licit import of the seized garlic. Drivers of the vehicles definitely had knowledge of the contraband and smuggled nature of garlic. That is why the drivers ran away and never came forward during investigation. There is thus nothing irregular regarding confiscation of said vehicles & their release on payment of redemption fine. No interference is therefore called for regarding confiscation / redemption of vehicles order passed by the Adjudicating authority. Correct residential details of the drivers were not maintained by the owners when they were giving vehicles valued more than ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the basis of a secret information on 23/3/2001 the officers of customs Preventive Division, Muzaffarpur took a position at Jhaphan and saw a truck coming from Sitamarhi side at 07.15 AM. After getting signal driver of the truck stopped the vehicle but fled from the site. Thereafter three more trucks. Were also stopped by the officers but they also fled away taking the benefit of heavy traffic. That all the four trucks, bearing registration No. BR-52-6079, BR-1GA-2573 HR- 38K6374 that BR-1GA 1298 were found to be loaded with garlic. That on checking in the presence of independent witness all the four truck were found to contain Chinese garlic bearing marks as sun-king Sun Power. That these trucks alongwith Garlic were brought to Div ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i, Gandak at Sikandarpur, MuZaffarpur. 2.3. That after the issue of first show cause notice on 24/08/2009, the identity of the real owners of the truck established on the basis of reporters from District Transport officers to whom letters were issued by the investigation. That statements of all the four truck owners/Authorized person were recorded, during which they disowned the garlic of Chinese origin and also stated that their drivers have undertaken the clandestine activity without their knowledge. That addresses of these drivers were also given but the addresses were either found to be in correct or incomplete. 2.4. That a corrigendum dt 16/04/10 was issued to the first SCM dt 27/08/2009 and the same were adjudicated under OIO No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enalties can not be imposed upon his clients as they had no knowledge of the activities undertaken by their drivers:- (i) Manjeet Singh VS CC New Delhi [2001(127)ELT 153(Tri. Del.)] (ii) CC(P) Kolkata Vs Md. Abdul Salam [2005 (186)ELT 2931(Tri. Kolkata)] (iii) Munna Vs CC Lucknow [2003(157)ELT 348 (Tri-Del.)] (iv) Bombay Bangalore Freight carriers PVT LTD VS CCE, N. Delhi [2004(163) ELT 213 (Tri. Del)] (v) Nalakath spices Trading Co. Vs CC. cochin[2007(213)ELT 283(Tri, Bang)] (vi) CC (sea) Chennai VS CESTAT Chennai [2009(246) ELT 121 (mad.)] (vii) Vikram logistics Vs maritime service Pvt Ltd CC Mysore [2014(301) ELT 497 (Tri. Bang)] (viii) CC Lucknow Vs Balwinder Singh [2010(255) ELT 514(All.)] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the OIO. Learned AR relied upon the case law of S. Jamal Vs CC (AIR) Chennai [2014(307) ELT-269 Mad)]. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The only issue required to be decided in these proceedings is whether appellants had prior knowledge of the Smuggled nature of the seized garlic of Chinese origin. It is the case of the appellants that the drivers have done the clandestine activity of transportation of garlic of foreign origin without their knowledge and that their trucks can not be confiscated under Sec-115 and no penalty can be imposed upon them under Sec-112 of the Customs Act 1962. On the other hand case of the Revenue is that circumstantial evidences suggest the knowledge of the owners of the drivers as such an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellants is concerned though no Section has been quoted in the order portion by the adjudicating authority but Sec 112 (b) of the Customs Act 1962 has been discussed in Para- 4.09 of the OIO dt 17/05/2013. It has been rightly observed by the Adjudicating authority that correct residential details of the drivers were not maintained by the owners when they were giving vehicles valued more than ₹ 10 lakh to the drivers. In the era of mobile phones it is not expected that owners of the truck will not keep a watch on the movement of his vehicle when they are declaring that strict monitoring was being done by them. A copy of the driving license, Voter ID etc is always kept by an employer to check the identify authenticity of their emp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
