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

1969 (10) TMI 24

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed. Subsequently they were handed over to the officers of the Central Excise Department. The authorities of the Central Excise Department issued a show cause notice to the petitioners herein on the allegation that the goods found in the room were smuggled goods. The petitioners sent their reply contending that they had arrived from Malaya by steamer on 31-5-1964 after a long stay away from India and they had brought the goods in question after examination by the Customs authorities at the Nagapattinam port and after payment of duty. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Integrated Division, No. 21. Nungambakkam High Road, Madras, 34, passed an order on 17-9-1965. He released certain goods on the basis of the duty receipt produced by th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssed without a licence. The circumstances of the case leave only one inference, namely that the seized goods include those previously imported by someone (other than the offenders as passenger's baggage) and sold contrary to the conditions under which the import was allowed. Hence they are liable for confiscation." From this it will be clear that the Assistant Collector did not find that the petitioners themselves smuggled the goods in question, but they purchased the goods from somebody else who had smuggled the goods into India. For the purpose of coming to this conclusion, he relied on the fact that the petitioners had paid the Customs duty of Rs. 495 only on goods valued Rs. 3,572.70 and the correct duty payable on goods of such value .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ned in carrying the smuggled goods, in dealing in the smuggled goods, harbouring the smuggled goods, concealing the goods, selling the smuggled goods, purchasing the smuggled goods. Shri Syed Ibrahim, son of Mustafa Periapattinam, Ramnad District, is called upon to show cause to the Collector of Central Excise, No. 21, Nungambakkam High Road, Madras 34 within 15 days after receipt of this notice. (i) Why the smuggled goods seized and mentioned in the annexed schedule should not be confiscated to Government under Sections 111(d) and 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 3 of the Import and Export Control Act, 1947 and why the currency seized, viz. Rs. 2,180 should not be confiscated to Government under Section 121 of the Custom .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... other law for the time being in force, are liable to confiscation. Similarly, section 111(o) says that any goods exempted, subject to any condition, from duty or any prohibition in respect of the import thereof under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, in respect of which the condition is not observed unless the non-observance of the condition was sanctioned by the proper officer, are liable to confiscation. There has been no allegation of fact in the show cause notice to bring the case of the petitioners within the scope of either Section 111(d) or Section 111(o). With regard to Section 111(d) there is a general, indefinite and vague allegation in the midst of several of the allegations jumbled up, that the goods have be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on arriving in India after more than a year's stay outside is entitled to clearance of goods worth Rs. 1,600 as part of his bona fide baggage without payment of duty. If so, admittedly the two petitioners herein were entitled to clearance of goods worth Rs. 3,200 free of duty, because according to the petitioner in W. P. No. 1143 of 1967 he was returning to India after a lapse of 50 years and according to the petitioner in W. P. No. 1144 of 1967 he was returning to India after a period of 8 years. If so, the value of goods liable to duty would be only Rs. 372.70 and the payment of duty of Rs. 495 was fully consistent with their case that the goods brought by them were cleared through the Customs and after the allowance duty free goods, they .....

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