Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Calcutta
Shri Arbind Kumar vs Commissioner Of Customs, Patna on 3 May, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2001(135)ELT143(TRI-KOLKATA)
ORDER
MRs. Archana Wadhwa
1. After dispensing with the condition of predeposit of penalty, I take up the appeal itself with the consent of both sides.
2. The appellants are aggrieved with the confiscation of three bags out of total 14 bags and two polythene carry-bags recovered from the roof of the bus in question under the provisions of Customs Act, 1962, on the finding of the same being of foreign origin and with the imposition of personal penalty of Rs.5,000.00. The finding as regards the smuggled nature of the betel nuts, has been arrived at by the authorities below on the ground of the appellant having claimed the betel nuts after a period of two months from the date of seizure of the same. The documentary proof of acquisition of the betel nuts and their reflection in the stock records have been rejected by the authorities below on the ground that the said records are not authenticated and the road permit shown by the appellant has been used after a lapse of 13 years leaving ample doubt. As such, it is seen that all the evidences discussed by the authorities below are more in the nature of doubt which may raise suspicion against the appellant but cannot take the place of legal evidence. It is also noticed that the betel nuts are non-notified items under the provisions of Section 123 and as such, the onus to establish the foreign origin and the smuggled character of the same lies heavily upon the Revenue. The Revenue has not produced any evidence to reflect upon the goods being of foreign origin and of smuggled character and as such, I find no justification in the impugned Orders. The same are accordingly set aside and appeal is allowed with consequential reliefs to the appellant.
Dictated in the open court.