2001 (8) TMI 396

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....posed penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may briefly be stated as under: 3. On receipt of secret information, the officers of Customs, Lucknow visited Charbagh Railway Station, Lucknow on 6-9-1994 and detected a consignment of Gambier of foreign origin loaded in the brake van of train No. 2553UP, Vaishali Express and booked for Kanpur. The consignment could not be unloaded at Lucknow and the officers accompanied the consignment to Kanpur. However, even at Kanpur, the goods could not be unloaded on some technical ground and thereafter the consignment was brought to Kanpur by the same train on its return journey and at Kanpur, the goods were detained by the officers on 8-9-1994 along with some oth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y of the impugned order by raising two-fold contentions. Firstly, the Commissioner of Customs, Lucknow had no jurisdiction to try the case. Secondly, that neither the report of the Public Analyst, U.P. Government, Lucknow nor the Trade opinion received at the back of the appellants about the nature of the goods were supplied to the appellants. Therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside on these grounds. 7. On the other hand, the learned SDR has only reiterated the correctness of the impugned order. 8. We have heard both the sides and gone through the record. 9. The facts are not much in dispute. Admittedly, the impugned goods were got cleared by the appellants through LCS Bairgania vide Bill of Entry Nos.....