2001 (1) TMI 495

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 11,45,000.00 with an option to the appellants to redeem the same on payment of Redemption Fine of Rs. 3.00 lakh. The balance of 5979 Mtrs. of Silk Fabric seized from the appellants' premises, has been ordered to be released unconditionally. A personal penalty of Rs. 50,000.00 has been imposed upon the appellants under the provisions of Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Shri Sudhir Mehta, learned Advocate for the appellants submits that as a result of search of their business-cum-godown premises by the Customs Officers on 27-1-1999, Silk Fabric of Chinese origin was seized by the Officers. Statements of various persons were recorded. Thereafter, show cause notice was issued proposing confiscation of the Silk Fabric and i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... had also stated that he had brought the goods to the appellants, the appellants were not required to produce the documents substantiating the transactions between M/s. Saboo Sarees and M/s. Kalipar Engg. He has submitted that the very basis of the reasoning adopted by the Commissioner is erroneous and the impugned Order is liable to be set aside on this ground. Shri Mehta also argues that the Silk Fabrics are not notified items under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 and as such, the onus is upon the Revenue to establish that the goods are smuggled. On the contrary, the appellants have produced a document, the bona fides of which are not doubted by the Revenue. As such, the adverse findings against the appellants based only on absence o....