1995 (2) TMI 195

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....given on payment of fine in lieu of confiscation of Rs. 30,000/-. 2. Shri Harbans Singh, learned counsel for the appellants submitted during the hearing that Shri Vijay Kumar is the Booking Clerk of the Transport Company, which had accepted the goods in question and loaded them for transport to Ludhiana. He had requested for cross-examination of the panch witnesses and the concerned departmental officers. The appellant had cooperated with the department. He had shown the tempo which had brought the goods to them for being loaded in their truck. He did not know about the contraband nature of the goods in question. Penalty had been imposed on him under Section 112 of Customs Act. He had not done anything or omitted to do anything which ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ting authority had held in his impugned order that he had admitted in his statement that he had accepted the goods for transportation and that no bill/document was produced for the same. From the statement of the driver of the truck, it was clear that the goods were loaded in the truck, that Shri Vijay Kumar had knowledge of the contents of the packages and as such it was held that the involvement of Shri Vijay Kumar was proved beyond doubt. 6. We find that the above discussion in the impugned order does not bring out the involvement of Shri Vijay Kumar in regard to carrying, removing, depositing, harbouring, keeping, concealing or dealing with goods in any other matter knowing or having reason to believe that they are liable to confi....