TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (2) TMI 832
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eding, the penalty order dated 14-5-2001 (Annexure-3) of the Commissioner of Customs is affirmed by the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as CEGAT) by its order dated 25-2-2002 [2002 (143) E.L.T. 358 (T)]. 3. Before proceeding to adjudicate on the matter, a brief recording of the necessary facts may be in order. 3.1 On specific information received to the effect that gold of foreign origin were being carried by two passengers travelling in a Tata Sumo vehicle on 11-11-99, the vehicle was intercepted near Ghagra bridge on Silchar-Karimganj road. 3.2 The two persons sitting in the front seat were questioned by the Customs Officers and one of them Shymal Chakraborty after some hesit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bita Das. They also seized a pair of shoe worn by Shymal Chakraborty where the gold was concealed. Incidentally the shoe worn by Shri Chakraborty was purchased by the petitioner and was usually kept in petitioner's custody. The bank accounts of the petitioner were also scrutinized and it was concluded that the petitioner is involved in smuggling gold bars from Bangladesh for delivery at Silchar. The Commissioner of Customs did not accept the petitioner's contention that he was only a co-passenger in the vehicle and had no connection with the gold bars carried by Shymal Chakaborty. Accordingly it was held that the petitioner and others were liable to penalty and accordingly after ordering confiscation of the seized gold, a penalty of Rs. 5 l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting the respondents, it is argued by Mr. B. Sharma that the petitioner was afforded all opportunities to rebut the charges made against him and the allegation of forced confession has also been examined by the CEGAT. However after due consideration, the Tribunal found that penalty was rightly inflicted on the petitioner as he was involved with smuggling of contraband gold and under this circumstances, it is submitted that interference of the writ Court would be unjustified. 11. Section 106 of the Customs Act gives power to stop and search vehicles suspected to be used in smuggling. Section 108 empowers the Customs authorities to summon persons to give evidence and produce documents. Seizure of goods, documents etc. are permitted to b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pecting a person of having committed the crime under the Act can record his statement, such as a person perforce is not a person accused under the Act. 2. He becomes accused of the offence under the Act only when a complaint is laid by the competent Customs Officer in the Court of competent jurisdiction or Magistrate to take cognisance of the offence and summons are issued. Thereafter, he becomes a person accused of the offence. 3. A statement recorded or given by the person suspected of having committed an offence during the enquiry under Section 108 of the Act or during confiscation proceedings is not a person accused of the offence within the meaning of Section 24 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in custody at Shillong from 11-11-2009 (sic) to 18-11-1999 several inculpatory statements were obtained from him and the co-accused. 13.1 In my view such a plea can't have much bearing inasmuch as, several such statements on 12-11-99, 13-11-99 and 17-11-99, were recorded during the so called custodial period where the petitioner gave details of his previous activities in smuggling gold. But the statement given by the petitioner and by his co-accused Shymal Chakraborty on 11-11-99 i.e. the day of the seizure at Silchar and recovery of gold from the person of Shymal Chakraborty are very relevant. On 11-11-09 (sic) the petitioner was not in custody at Shillong. Therefore, the statement recorded on 11-11-09 (sic) can't be said to be un....