TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (6) TMI 109
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....confiscated by the Adjudicating Authority on the ground that the applicant without declaring the same opted for the Green Channel. He was allowed to redeem the same on payment of a redemption fine of Rs. 40,000/-and was imposed with a penalty of Rs. 10,000/-. The penalty of Rs. l0,000/- was confirmed by this Tribunal and the applicant was allowed to redeem the goods in question on payment of Rs.t7,500/- instead of Rs. 40,000/- as ordered by the Adjudicating Authority. To that extent, the redemption fine was reduced. The applicant has already paid the penalty of Rs.10,000/-. 2. The learned Counsel, Shri Ashish Roy appearing for the applicant contended that the applicant is a poor person employed as a driver and out of ignorance he did not d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of his contention, he relied on a decision of Delhi High Court reported in 1992 (38) ECC 94. He, therefore, prayed that the application for modification of the Order of the Tribunal may be rejected. 4. The learned Counsel, Shri Roy further stated that the decision of the Delhi High Court is not applicable to the facts of this case. In that particular case, even though the passenger was asked to declare the possession of the articles, he denied the same and thereafter, the articles were seized from his possession. But in this case, the moment the applicant was questioned, he came forth with the truth that he was in possession of the gold chain in question and he did not declare the same as he was unaware of the law. In view of the peculiar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The decision reported in 1991 (56) E.L.T. 774 (Tribunal) in the case of Ajay Kumar Paik v. Collector of Customs, is relied on by the learned Counsel for the applicant. But it does not apply to the facts of the present case. In that particular case, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that if the statement of the appellant is read as a whole, it be comes clear that he wanted to declare these articles, but before he could do so his baggage was searched and the T.V. and the Video Cassettes and Video Camera in question were found in the baggage. The Tribunal also held that the appellant in that case, wanted the officers to write in his passport that he may take back the goods in question to Germany. In that view of the matter, it was held that....