Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Nadeem Hussain vs Kolkata(Admn Airport) on 29 January, 2026
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH : KOLKATA
REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO.2
Customs Appeal No.77202 of 2019
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.KOL/CUS(AIRPORT)/AA/374/2019 dated
03.06.2019 passed by Principal Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Kolkata.)
Nadeem Hussain
(S/o Ashfaq Hussain, House No.68, Husaini (Chaubana), Firozabad, U.P.-283203.)
...Appellant
VERSUS
Commissioner of Customs (Airport & Administration), Kolkata
.....Respondent
(15/1, Strand Road, Custom House, Kolkata-700001.) APPEARANCE Adjournment Request for the Appellant (s) Shri Tariq Suleman, Authorized Representative for the Revenue CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI R. MURALIDHAR, MEMBER(JUDICIAL) FINAL ORDER NO. 75147/2026 DATE OF HEARING : 29.01.2026 DATE OF DECISION : 29.01.2026 R. MURALIDHAR :
The Appellant has sought adjournment on the ground that they are in the process of appointing a new Counsel. Finding that the Appeal pertains to the year 2019, the Appeal itself was taken up for disposal with the active help of the Ld.AR for the Revenue.
2. The Ld.AR for the Department submits that the gold (1169 gms.) along with 10 bottles of Johnnie Walker Black Lebel Whisky valued at Rs.35,18,690/- was seized from the person of the Appellant. The present Appellant submitted that he is not a literate person and he was to go by train to Firozabad, but was told by the other Noticee Kapil Rathore to carry the two packets by Flight to New Delhi. Hence, he 2 Customs Appeal No.77202 of 2019 submits that he is only an innocent carrier and not actually involved in the alleged smuggling of the contraband goods.
3. After going through the case records, I find that no specific case has been made out against the Appellant to show his active involvement in the alleged smuggling of the contraband goods. However, it is on record that he has handled the contraband goods while travelling to New Delhi when he was intercepted and the contraband goods were recovered. Therefore, I find that he is liable to be penalized by way of penalty. I find that for the goods valued at Rs.36.00 Lakhs (approx.), the penalty of Rs.10.00 Lakhs on the present Appellant, who was only the carrier, is on the higher side. I reduce the penalty to Rs.1.00 Lakh (Rupees One Lakh only). The pre-deposit made by the Appellant while filing the Appeals before the Commissioner(Appeals) and the present Appeal before the Tribunal, may be adjusted against the penalty of Rs.1.00 Lakh.
4. The Appeal stands disposed of thus.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court.) Sd/ (R. MURALIDHAR) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) sm