1995 (9) TMI 151

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appellant and on an other person namely Upkar Singh Sandhu under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appeal of Shri Upkar Singh Sandhu is not before us. The appellants have not challenged the absolute confiscation of the impugned goods but has challenged the imposition of personal penalty of Rs. 20,000/-. The case against the appellant is based on the recovery of a chit which contained a name of Shri Prem Pathan said to have been recovered from the site of encounter alongwith the goods under seizure. The Department conducted the investigation and a show-cause notice was issued to the appellant and Shir Upkar Singh Sandhu on 15-6-1990. The same was not served on them and therefore, it had been pasted on the Notice Board of Customs Hous....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....efore, he has imposed the personal penalty of Rs. 20,000/- under Section 112 of the Customs Act. 2. We have heard Ms. Archana Wadhawa, ld. Advocate and Shri Sanjeev Sachdeva, ld. SDR for the Revenue. Ld. Advocate submitted that there is absolutely no evidence to link between the chit recovered and the appellant. The chit was supposed to have been in the name of Prem Pathan while the appellant's name is Prem Kumar Chadha. He is an innocent person doing business of brokerage. The appellant has absolutely no connection with the smuggling of narcotics and he had been deliberately implicated in the case on the basis of suspension, presumption and assumption and hence the order is totally unsustainable in law. 3. Ld. DR reiterated the find....