TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 674X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned order. We find merit in this submission and accordingly we set aside the order and remand the case for de novo consideration by the Commissioner - appeal disposed off - matter on remand. - Appeal Nos. C/79 to 82/02, C/709, 710/01-Mum - A/93243-93248/16/CB - Dated:- 21-10-2016 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri V.R. Reddy, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Revenue None for appellant-assessee ORDER Per Raju The appellants, Bharat Chudasama and Bhupendra Chudasama, among others were issued a notice by Revenue for alleged smuggling of gold. On 13.4.1997, these appellants arrived in Mumbai by Air India Flight No.GF-64. When the appellants were proceeding towards the exit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be not required any declaration was subsequently released. The redemption fine was reduced to ₹ 10 lakhs each for the gold and currency combined. The penalty was reduced to ₹ 3 lakhs each. 2. Against the order of the Commissioner, Revenue also filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The appeal was filed after the order of the Tribunal was issued in respect of the appeal filed by the appellants. It was held that the Revenue appeal was filed after the date of disposal of the appeal filed by the aggrieved persons. In this situation, the Tribunal held the appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable, as the order has already been merged with the final order passed by the Tribunal much before an application pursuant to the dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the panchnama but were only told about the contents of the panchnama. It was argued that the panchas had not witnessed the interception of the appellants and therefore there was no independent corroboration of the testimony of the officers of DRI. It was argued that the quantum of personal penalty and redemption fine is excessive. It was argued that the Revenue has failed to establish that the appellants were intercepted in the passage after the exit gate of customs. It was argued that they were carrying the foreign currency for the purpose of payment of duty. It was argued that they were intercepted in the arrival hall of customs which was prior to their making the declaration at the customs counter and hence the question of making a dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Karim Devji. It also does not deal with the fact that all three tickets were booked through the same agent by the same person on the same day in Dubai. It also does not deal with the fact that all three immigration cards were found to be filled in the same handwriting. In view of the above, the Revenue has sought to set aside of the order of the Commissioner and remand for de novo consideration. 7. We have gone through the rival submissions. We find that the impugned order does not deal with the role of two noticees, viz. Karim D. Hajiali and Taherbhai insofar as the charges against the said persons have neither been confirmed nor dropped. To that extent, the impugned order cannot be sustained and needs to be set aside. The Revenue has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
