2006 (2) TMI 471

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and recovered US $ 19,500/- from them. The statements were recorded of these two persons and led residential premises of Devki Nandan and Shiv Shankar who were purported to be the purchasers of the gold from these people. The statement of Shiv Shankar was recorded who in his statement stated that they were dealing in smuggled gold and also stated that the recovered foreign currency were proceeds of the sale of gold biscuits. The current appellant was also implicated on the ground that Shiv Shankar in his statement has stated that he used to procure foreign currency from the current appellant. The show cause notice was issued to all the persons including the current appellant, which the adjudicating authority concluded by imposition of penal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....concerned in carrying, removing, depositing, harbouring, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner dealing with any goods which he knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation under Section 111, shall be liable, - (i)      in the case of goods in respect of which any prohibition is in force under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, to a penalty not exceeding five times the value of the goods or one thousand rupees, whichever is the greater; (ii)     in the case of dutiable goods, other than prohibited goods, to a penalty not exceeding five times the duty sought to be evaded on such goods or one thousand rupees, whichever is the gre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant part reproduced in the order-in-original), no where states that the foreign currency was purchased or procured by him from the current appellant. Further, from para 6 of the order-in-original, wherein the statement of Shri Jugal Kishore is reproduced, categorically states that "he knew Devki Nandan and Shiv Shankar; but he did not have any business relationship with them for the past one and half year" in itself is not enough and also that the appellant had the knowledge that the said Shiv Shankar and Devki Nandan were into smuggling of goods is not enough to implicate him in the current proceeding which led recovery of foreign exchange from the person. The statement of the appellant categorically states that he has not dealt in any man....