Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (1) TMI 510

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nged to him. In his retraction he claimed that he was forced to admit that currency did not belong to him and the said currency was given to him by Shri Sabir to be delivered to Mr. Hazi Shaikh. In his retraction, he claimed that he has informed the officer that the said money was his hard earned money during his trip to Dubai during the year 2004. Later on, in his statement recorded on 31.1.2005, he again changed his stand and stated that he had never said or indicated that the currency found was his own and he had added that the said statements given by him during the period of his attendance in the AIU office was given voluntarily without any use of force and threat. Vide the impugned order dated 24.8.2006, the said currency was confisca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as observed as follows: - "6. We have perused the order of Commissioner of Customs dated [28th September 2005]. In Paragraph No. 19 there is a clear statement by the respondent herein that he was claiming ownership in the goods. No other person had claimed ownership in the goods. Under Section 125(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, provides that in a case where there is an order for redemption of the goods on payment of fine where the owner is not known, the person from whose possession or custody, such goods have been seized is entitled to apply and be given the goods. 7. In our opinion, the issue whether the petitioner in W.P. 1022/09 herein, has established his title to the goods is not relevant. No other person has claimed title in the go .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -2015 (320) ELT 368 (Del) and the Hon'ble High Court has observed as under: - 8. It is clear from leading of the aforesaid two paragraphs that the applicant had initially in his statement under Section 108 of the Act, admitted that the currency was given to him by Vinod Kumar Saini, resident of .Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan for handing over to one Rakesh, who was to collect the same from Dubai. He had also given the mobile number of Rakesh and Vinod Kumar Saini. The applicant had also named Tulsi Ram, the owner of the vehicle and that he along with Vinod Kumar Saini had dropped him at the .Jaipur Airport. Statement of Vinod Kumar Saini was recorded wherein he admitted that he had gone to the airport at Jaipur to see off the applicant. Vinod .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ovisions are to be absolutely confiscated." 9. In the aforesaid paragraphs, the Revisionary Authority held that the Applicant was merely a carrier of the said currency, which the applicant wanted to take out of India for monetary considerations. The Indian currency was concealed to avoid being detected. It is clear from the aforesaid finding that the applicant was not treated as the owner of the said currency and as far as ownership is concerned, it was clearly implied that the ownership belonged to Vinod Kumar Saini, who had given the said currency to the applicant for being taken to Dubai. It was meant to be delivered to Rakesh. 10. Neither with the writ petition nor with the present application, any details or particulars of any orde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... view of the above, we do not find any merit in the present application and the same is dismissed." The learned AR argued that the facts of the case are same and absolute confiscation needs to be upheld. 4. I have considered the rival submissions. I find that Larger Bench has settled the issue and has observed as follows: - "In case a person attempted to export Indian currency outside India without permission of RBI more than Rs. 5,000/- or Rs. 10,000/- (as the case may be) in that case the Indian currency can be absolutely confiscated and it is discretion of the proper officer in the facts and circumstances of the case be allowed to redeem on payment of redemption fine and imposition of penalty." Larger Bench has given full discretion .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates