TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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 upholds penalties for smuggling goods, deems confessional statements valid.</h1> The Tribunal upheld penalties imposed by the Commissioner of Customs on five appellants for smuggling goods worth Rs. 90,49,550 from Nepal to India. The ... Penalty - Evidence - Corroborative - Confession - Natural justice - Cross-examination - Seizure Issues involved: Imposition of penalties by the Commissioner of Customs based on smuggling allegations, validity of confessional statements, violation of natural justice, relevance of corroborative evidence, and quantum of penalty imposed.Imposition of Penalties: The five appellants were penalized by the Commissioner of Customs for their involvement in smuggling goods worth Rs. 90,49,550 from Nepal to India. The penalties imposed were Rs. 5,00,000 on each of appellants No. 1 to 4 and Rs. 3,00,000 on appellant No. 5.Validity of Confessional Statements: The appellants contested the validity of their confessional statements, claiming lack of direct evidence connecting them to the smuggling. They argued that their retracted statements should not have been used against them without corroborative evidence, and alleged violation of natural justice in the proceedings.Corroborative Evidence and Legal Precedents: The Tribunal found that the confessional statements of the appellants, made voluntarily during interrogation, were sufficient to charge them under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act. The retraction of the confessions was deemed belated and disregarded. Legal precedents were cited to support the decision to uphold the confessional statements as valid evidence.Violation of Natural Justice: The Tribunal concluded that there was no violation of natural justice in the proceedings, as the confessions were voluntary and no external statements implicated the appellants. The illiteracy of a panchnama witness did not invalidate the proceedings, especially since the witness did not dispute the preparation of the panchnama.Quantum of Penalty Imposed: The Commissioner of Customs provided detailed reasons for imposing penalties on the appellants, which the Tribunal found reasonable and upheld. The penalties were deemed appropriate considering the anti-national activities of the appellants and the facts of the case.Conclusion: After thorough review and consideration of the arguments presented, the Tribunal dismissed all appeals, affirming the penalties imposed by the Commissioner of Customs and finding no merit in the appellants' claims.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
