TMI Blog1970 (4) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eath of the deceased have carried on and are still carrying on the business of Messrs. National Radio. 3.On the 7th April, 1965 the shop of Messrs. National Radio was searched by various officers of the Customs Department. In course of the search, the Customs Officers seized 16 transistors, one tape recorder and a flat file. 4.Thereafter the usual notice to show cause was served on Messrs. National Radio and also on one Shri Dwarka Das Singh the petitioner No. 5 who, according to the petitioner Nos. 1 to 4, had kept these 14 transistors radios in a steal trunk with Messrs. National Radio in its said shop for minor repairs. 5.In the meantime, Gopal Chandra Dey dies and his minor son the petitioner No. 3 attended the enquiry proceeding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is stated as follows :- "No evidence whatsoever was adduced or tendered on behalf of the Customs Department in support of the contention of the Department that the seized articles had been illegally imported. In fact no evidence or material on any point whatsoever was adduced on behalf of the Customs Department." 10.Reference is next made to the order of adjudication in support of this contention that no evidence of any one on behalf of the Customs Authorities has been recorded or referred to therein. 11.In my view, this contention that no evidence was adduced by or on behalf of the Customs Authorities is well founded. I do not find any record either in the order of adjudication or in the proceedings of any evidence tendered by or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... natural justice. 15.Mr. Gupta also argued that there were no materials in support of the findings of the adjudicating authority and consequently it must be held to be perverse. Lastly, it was contended that before personal penalty can be levied under section 112 of the Customs Act 1962, it was necessary for the authorities to come to a finding that the peitioner had knowledge or had reason to believe that the goods were liable to confiscation. Such a finding is not there in the order of adjudication. 16.Having regard to my finding on the question of onus, I am not inclined to express any opinion on the merits of these contentions which I have briefly recorded above. I make it clear however that it will be open to the petitioner to have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
