2003 (1) TMI 333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... officers of Customs. Foreign goods were recovered from all the persons except the appellant. Fake Indian currency was recovered from two persons including the appellant. Believing that the goods were being illegally imported from Nepal into India and hence liable to confiscation, the officers seized the goods under a Panchnama. Statements of all the persons were recorded. Some follow up investigations also were conducted. On the basis of the investigative results, the department by show cause notice called upon the appellant and others to show cause why, inter alia, penalties should not be imposed on them under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, for their alleged involvement in the smuggling of contraband goods. The noticees contested the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....enalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act was not warranted. Counsel refers to the allegation that fake currency was recovered from the appellant's possession. He submits that the appellant was not aware of the presence of fake currency in the bags carried by him and had nothing to do with those goods. He also refers to the statements given by the appellant under Sections 107 and 108 of the Customs Act. However, no copy of any of the statements is available on record. Even a copy of the show cause notice is not available. Ld. counsel, finally, pleads for a lenient view against the appellant in the facts and circumstances of the case. Ld. DR reiterates the findings recorded by the Commissioner. He submits that the evidence on record would ....