TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Overturns Penalties in Smuggling Case</h1> <h3>Shri P.P. Sunil Kumar, Shri Shanavas M., Shri Subair Kallungal, Shri Ashruf Kallungal, Shri Thondandavida Kaniyan Kandi Faizal Faizas and Smt. Hajira Koodakkara Versus Commissioner of Customs, Cochin</h3> Shri P.P. Sunil Kumar, Shri Shanavas M., Shri Subair Kallungal, Shri Ashruf Kallungal, Shri Thondandavida Kaniyan Kandi Faizal Faizas and Smt. Hajira ... Issues Involved:1. Confiscation of smuggled gold under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962.2. Imposition of penalties under Sections 112(a), 112(b), 114A, and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.3. Liability of various individuals involved in the smuggling operation.4. Procedural fairness and adherence to natural justice principles.Detailed Analysis:1. Confiscation of Smuggled Gold:The Revenue received intelligence about passengers smuggling gold bars from Dubai to Cochin. Upon search, 20 kg of gold bars were found concealed in jackets worn by two lady passengers. The gold was seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, and was deemed liable for confiscation under Section 111 of the Act. The gold was valued at INR 5,78,45,400/- with a market value of INR 6,38,03,476/-.2. Imposition of Penalties:Penalties were proposed under Sections 112(a), 112(b), 114A, and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, against various individuals for their roles in the smuggling operation.3. Liability of Various Individuals:- Mrs. Arifa Haris and Mrs. Asifa Veerappoyil: Both were found with 10 kg of gold each and were penalized under Sections 112(a), 112(b), and 114AA for attempting to smuggle gold and mis-declaring contents of their baggage.- Mr. Haris Abdul Rahman: Found with a letter from M/s. A.U. Jewellery indicating purchase of gold. He was penalized under Sections 112(a) and 114AA for his role in smuggling and facilitating the smuggling operation.- Mr. T.K. Faiz: Alleged to have masterminded the smuggling operation and facilitated the clearance of the passengers. He was penalized under Sections 112(a) and (b).- Mr. P.P. Sunil Kumar: Alleged to have facilitated the unhindered exit of passengers carrying smuggled gold. However, his penalty was set aside as there was no evidence of his involvement in the smuggling activity.- Mr. M. Shanavas: Alleged to have acquired possession of smuggled gold. The gold and cash seized from his shop were ordered to be released, and his penalty was set aside.- Mr. Subair Kallungal and Mr. Ashraf Kallungal: Alleged to have transported and financed the smuggling operation. Their penalties were set aside due to lack of evidence and inconsistencies in the statements against them.- Mrs. Hajira Koodakkara: Alleged to have allowed her car to be used for smuggling. The proposal for penalty was dropped due to lack of evidence.4. Procedural Fairness and Adherence to Natural Justice Principles:The Tribunal found that the penalties were based on uncorroborated statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, and that there was no other documentary evidence brought on record by the Revenue. The appellants were not given an opportunity to cross-examine the individuals who made statements against them, which violated principles of natural justice. The Tribunal also noted inconsistencies and contradictions in the statements relied upon by the Revenue.Conclusion:The Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed on the appellants due to lack of concrete evidence, inconsistencies in the statements, and procedural lapses in adhering to principles of natural justice. The appeals filed by the appellants were allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
