Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2006 (3) TMI 655

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or consideration are that two trucks were seized by the Police Authorities at Nepal Border suspected to be carrying smuggled goods. When the trucks were intercepted, the drivers absconded and were never traced. The authorities from the papers available in the trucks traced the owners of the trucks and issued show-cause notice to them regarding confiscation of the truck and imposition of penalty on them. One of the owner of the truck intimated the name of his driver and his address but could not produce the driver before the authorities for recording statements. All the three appellants contested the show-cause notice before the adjudicating authority and the adjudicating authority vide his Order-in-Original dated 30th July, 2003, absolutely....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....operate with the authorities in producing the drivers of the truck which would have helped to investigate the matter properly. In the absence of any co-operation from the owner, it has to be presumed that they were abetting the crime. 5. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. I find from the records that the appellants in Appeal Nos. CSM-14/05 & CSM-15/05, were the owners of the truck. They have not brought any evidence to show that they were informed by the drivers that they were loading truck with goods for which documents were available with them. On the contrary, I find from the records that the appellant in Appeal No. CSM-16/05, had in fact talked to the appellant in Appeal No. CSM-15/05, that he....