2000 (1) TMI 480

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....st is that the appellant was denied sufficient opportunity to inspect the documents, which were relied upon. The examination of the material does not impel us to accept this argument. The Collector records that the appellant asked for inspection of original documents seized from him such as cheque book, account book and sought their return since they were not relied upon in the show cause notice. The appellant is not able to produce any evidence that inspection or return of documents were asked for in connection with defence. We are not able to find any prejudice has been caused to the appellant. 3. It is next contended that in those cases where the Addl. Collector has accepted that goods were imported by Prakash Vedia or any other ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s no evidence in support. Confiscation of the rechargeable batteries (at sr. no. 7 of the Collector's order) cannot be sustained for the reason that they are not notified goods. 5. No documents of importation have been produced with regard to other goods seized from the appellant nor these are contended that these are not notified. Hence confiscation of these goods under clause (d) of section 111 has to be sustained. 6. Confiscation under clause (p) of section 111 is questioned on the ground that the goods are professional equipment's which were used by the appellant and they were thus in his personally use. It is not possible to agree that the goods were personally used. They were used by the appellant not in his home for e....