Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. As the shipping bill in respect of the said container was filed by one Shri Yousef Moideen, Proprietor of M/s.Suweihan Exporting, Desamangalam, Trichur, he was summoned by the officers for recording of his statement. As per Shri Yousef Moideen, IE code was taken by him in the name of M/s. Suweihan Exporting as per the instructions of one Shri Musthafa whom he met while working in Gulf. The said IE code was obtained with an intention to import readymade wooden doors. As the import of wooden doors was an expensive affair, the same could not be done. Shri Musthafa introduced him to one Shri Karunakaran @ Kannan hailing from Chennai who wanted to export goods on behalf of M/s. Suweihan Exporting. Shri Kannan offered him to pay an amount of Rs.15000/- to Rs.25000/- for each consignment of red sanders which would be exported clandestinely. For the said purpose, he leased a godown in Pollachi for storing coir pith and there he met Shri Jayan, an agent in Cochin and Shri Prakash @ Senthil. As regards the present consignment, he gave the details of various meetings and how the consignment of red sanders was misdeclared as that of coir pith.

5. The statement of Shri Prakash @ Senthil was recorded on 17/11/2012 wherein he accepted the details given in the statement of Shri Kannan. Statement of Shri Suresh Kumar, Driver of the container trailer was also recorded.

6. On the basis of the disclosures made by Shri Yousef Moideen, Shri Kannan and Shri Senthil, Shri Antony Morris, resident of Cochin was summoned and his statement was recorded on 17/11/2012. In the said statement, he deposed that he met Shri Kannan for the first time in Willingdon Island around 10 months ago; that his details were given to Shri Kannan by Shri Moideen of Hongkong, who in turn got the said details from on Shri Shafeek, Thalassery ( the appellant in the present case); that he knew Shri Shafeek for the last 6 years but does not know his address; that Shri Shafeek was currently doing business in Dubai; that he discussed about logistic support and clearing facilities for smuggling of red sanders to Dubai with Shri Kannan and he agreed to arrange containers and trailers and also to help in clearing of export consignments containing red sanders. He also gave further details of Shri Jayan, Shri Musthafa and Shri Ashraf. The said Shri Antony Morris subsequently retracted his statement on 21/11/2012 by alleging that he was tortured and forced to make submissions. The said allegations made by Shri Antony Morris were found to be false by the Deputy Director, DRI, Cochin.

8. While dealing with the said submissions of the appellant, the Commissioner in his impugned order observed that as per the statement of Shri Antony Morris, it was the appellant, who introduced him to Shri Moideen, who in turn introduced him to Shri Kannan. As such, he concluded that the appellant provided the ring with link to Cochin. He further observed that although the appellant had not visited India after 26/07/2012, call data records of Shri Kannan and Shri Antony Morris during February 2012 to November 2012 obtained from the service providers showed that they were in contact with Shri Shafeek in Dubai, on a regular basis. He also referred to another case of smuggling in the past where red sanders were seized and statement of one Shri Anil Kumar was recorded wherein he had named the appellant as the person to whom the red sanders were to be exported. On the said basis, he held that the appellant is liable to penalty and imposed penalty of Rs.10 lakhs under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act.

10. Learned DR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the reasonsings adopted by the Commissioner and submits that the appellant is the kingpin sitting in Dubai, engaging himself and organizing everything for illegal export of the red sanders.

11.1. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides. After having gone through the facts of the case, we find that subsequent to the detection of the matter at International Container Transshipment Terminal and seizure of the red sanders, detailed investigations were made by the Revenue. As per records, the shipping bill was filed by one Shri Yousef Moideen, Proprietor of M/s. Suweihan Exporting for export of goods to M/s. C.P. General Trading, LLC, Deira, Dubai. Admittedly, the shipping bill was not in the name of the appellant. The statements of Shri Yousef Moideen, Shri Kannan, Shri Prakash @ Senthil, Shri Suresh Kumar and the other persons recorded during the course of investigations have not named the appellant at any point of time. It is only Shri Antony Morris, in his statement recorded on 17/11/2012, deposed that he met Shri Kannan for the first time around 10 months ago and his details were given to Shri Kannan by one Shri Moideen of Hongkong, who in turn got the said details from Shri Shafeek of Thalassery. Even Shri Morris, in his said statement, has nowhere attributed any role to Shri Shafeek about the alleged attempt of export of red sanders. The statement simplicitor reveals that he was introduced to Shri Kannan by Shri Moideen of Hongkong, who in turn was introduced through Shri Shafeek. It is a fact on record that Shri Moideen of Hongkong was untraced by the Customs authorities. In any case, we find that introduction of one person to another person who is subsequently found involved in illegal activities cannot be considered to be an offence so as to impose penalty upon him under the provisions of the Customs Act.