9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t order-in-original dated 12.12.2009, which upheld order-in-original dated 20.08.2009, in terms of which penalty of Rs. 1 lakh was imposed on the appellant. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 27.02.2007 specific intelligence was allegedly gathered by Customs to the effect that (i) intact garments in the name of old completely pre-mutilated garments would be fraudulently cleared from ICD, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the second truck both the trucks moved towards the exit gate and were intercepted by Customs officers. On being asked, the drivers of both the trucks, confirmed that they had got the said goods loaded from the impugned container. Further, they informed that they were not having any document related to the impugned goods and that they would get the gate pass at the exit gate of ICD, TKD. 3. No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... brings out that the Bill of Entry was filed with G card of the appellant, the papers relating to the goods were handed over to the appellant to get them cleared from Customs, he was aware that goods were not mutilated rags, and he got "good" amount for getting the consignment cleared. He arranged the trucks, and was guiding/instructing the drivers of the trucks. The appellant in his statement narr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
