1998 (12) TMI 131 - AT - Customs

Appellant's Non-Compliance Results in Upheld Smuggling Penalty

The appellant failed to comply with legal procedures, leading to the conclusion that the liquor seized from him was intended for export to Pakistan. The ... Confiscation of goods Issues: Violation of natural justice, Seizure of goods, Attempted export to Pakistan, Penalty impositionViolation of Natural Justice:The case involved the seizure of liquor from a Jonga jeep and the residence of the appellant, who was suspected of attempting to export the goods to Pakistan. The appellant raised a plea regarding the violation of the principle of natural justice. The adjudicating authority observed that despite clear directions from the High Court and multiple opportunities, the appellant failed to respond to show cause notices and attend personal hearings. The authority concluded that the appellant had nothing to say in the matter due to non-compliance with legal procedures.Seizure of Goods:The Customs Officers intercepted a Jonga jeep carrying liquor beyond Jodhpur-Jaisalmer, leading to the seizure of Indian made foreign liquor and rum. The occupants of the jeep admitted to loading the liquor from the residence of the appellant, who also could not provide evidence of legal possession. Subsequently, more liquor was found at the appellant's residence, and a statement from the appellant confirmed his involvement in giving the goods to the jeep occupants for smuggling to Pakistan. The adjudicating authority, after detailed discussion of the evidence, concluded that the liquor was intended for export to Pakistan, justifying the confiscation under Section 113 of the Customs Act.Attempted Export to Pakistan:The statements of the jeep occupants and the appellant, along with other evidence, indicated a clear attempt to export the seized goods to Pakistan. The confessional statements of the individuals involved corroborated each other, establishing the appellant's involvement in the smuggling operation. The lower appellate authority upheld the penalty imposed on the appellant based on the evidence and lack of response from the appellant, affirming that the liquor was indeed intended for export.Penalty Imposition:The appellant contested the penalty imposed on him for his role in the attempted export of liquor. However, the Tribunal found no merit in the appellant's arguments. The adjudication was based on the confessional statements of the appellant and the jeep occupants, which aligned with the evidence of the smuggling operation. The Tribunal upheld the lower authority's decision, emphasizing that the penalty was rightly imposed considering the appellant's involvement in the attempted export of the confiscated goods.---