New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (12) TMI 535 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2015 (12) TMI 535 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - 2016 (331) E.L.T. 337 (Mad.) - Confiscation under Section 111(d) and (l) - attempt to smuggle the goods (gold jewellery) in India in the baggages - Provisional release of seized goods - Held that:- DRI, Chennai Zonal Unit, on specific intelligence, had intercepted the petitioner at Anna International Airport, chennai, and on enquiry, it was revealed that the petitioner was coming from Sharjah via Trivandrum. On scrutiny of the Customs Declaration form by D .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ms, in order to evade the payment of Customs duty, the afore stated goods are liable for confiscation under the provisions of Section 111(d) and 111 (l) of the Customs Act, 1962 and hence, it cannot be released provisionally under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Petitioner had attempted to smuggle the goods into India only with an intention to evade payment of Customs duty and in the absence of any contention refuting the sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the adjudicating authority would decide whether the goods confiscated under Section 111(d) and 111(l) of the Customs Act, 1962, could be released or not. - Decided against the petitioner. - WP. No. 25517 of 2015, MP. No. 1 of 2015 - Dated:- 24-11-2015 - R. Mahadevan, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. B. Sathish Sundar For the Respondent : Mr. S. Haja Mohideen Gisthi Senior Standing Counsel ORDER In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner prayed for a direction to the Respondent to release the seized impor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

search in the baggages of the Petitioner. Thereafter, at Chennai Airport, the said goods were seized under mahazar dated 7.9.2014 on the ground that the Petitioner smuggled the said goods by concealing the same in his baggages. Thereafter, a statement was recorded from the Petitioner against his will on 8.9.2014 to the effect that the Petitioner attempted to take out the same through Green Channel, without payment of duty. The Petitioner sent representations dated 10.9.2014 and 15.9.2014. A furt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

esentation dated 26.6.2014 seeking release of the seized goods. Since there was no action on the part of the Respondent, this Writ Petition has been filed for the relief as stated above. 3. The Respondents filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is stated that all the relevant travel documents viz. boarding pass, customs declaration form, e-ticket, etc. were scrutinised by DRI. On scrutiny, it was found that against the column 'total value of the dutiable goods carried' by him, it was ment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ms duty and hence, the goods were seized, since the goods were liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) and (l) of the Act. The question of provisional release under Section 110 of the Act, does not arise in this case and only the provisions of baggage rules will be applicable. The adjudication proceedings is under process and the Petitioner can make all his submissions during the personal hearing. In such circumstances, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. Heard both sides. 5. T .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

relied upon the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court reported in 2011-269-ELT-A146-SC (Commissioner Vs. Navashakti Industries P Limited ) 6. On the other hand, the learned senior standing counsel for the Respondent reiterated the averments made in the counter affidavit and supported the impugned order, by contending that the goods in question were seized under the relevant provisions of the Act and that the adjudication is under process and the Petitioner can agitate his grievance during the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

against the column, 'total value of dutiable goods carried' by him, it was mentioned as 'Nil'. On enquiry by DRI as to whether he is in possession of any dutiable goods or foreign origin gold, he replied in the negative. 9. Thereafter, the DRI had examined the hand baggage and recovered 480 nos. of saffron packets each weighing 25 gms, totalling 12 kgs of saffron. Then the DRI officers had examined the two checked-in baggage and found to contain RMD Gutka Sachets pakced in 8 bla .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing Counsel appearing for the respondent that since the passenger had attempted to smuggle the goods into India by concealing the same in his person as well as in his hand baggage and checked-in-baggage, without declaring the same to the Customs, in order to evade the payment of Customs duty, the afore stated goods are liable for confiscation under the provisions of Section 111(d) and 111 (l) of the Customs Act, 1962 and hence, it cannot be released provisionally under Section 110 of the Customs .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version