TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 536
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ai 600005, by giving effect to the order passed by the 3rd Respondent in Order-in-Original No.58, dated 30.04.2015. 2. The case of the Petitioner is as follows:- a. The Petitioner is a Proprietorship Concern, registered with Small Scale Industries, bearing No.3300221100524 and carrying on the business of air ticketing, organizing tours and travels. The Petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- for interest as hand loan from the friends by giving money Bond and post dated cheques. Out of the said sum, Rs. 3,00,000/- was spent towards rental advance and infrastructural works. On 24.6.2014, when the Manager was present in the Office, four investigating officers entered into the said office at 12.30 hours without any search warrant and con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount if an order of adjudication is passed against the Petitioner. As against the same, WA.No.1720 of 2014 was filed by the Department and the said writ appeal was disposed by order dated 5.1.2015, directing the Department to issue fresh summons. Thereafter, fresh summon was issued to the Petitioner, to which the Petitioner appeared and filed a reply to the show cause notice dated 19.12.2014. c. Earlier the Petitioner was directed to show the cause to the Joint/ Additional Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Customs Commissionerate III, Chennai and when the Petitioner requested for personal hearing, he was informed that since two different adjudication officers were nominated for a single show cause notice, the same will be referred to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n to release Rs. 7 lakhs seized from the office of the Petitioner, as the same is not liable for confiscation under Section 121 of the Customs Act, 1962 and hence, till the disposal of the appeal, the seized amount cannot be released and prayed for dismissal of this Writ Petition. 6. I have considered the aforesaid submissions and perused the materials available on record and also the order impugned in this writ petition and the order of the appellate authority as well. 7. It is manifested from the records that when this matter was taken by this Court on 31.7.2015, the following direction was given, which reads as under:- "Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and taking note of the fact that the appeal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e handed over by Jalaludeen at his travels office viz., M/s.JKS Air Travels, tickets were booked by Jalaludeen, Shri Gani @ Naina Mohamed, staff of the travels accompanied Shri Jayabal Shivakumar on the directions of the appellant. These facts were corroborated by the appellant's company staff viz., Smt. Vimala and Shri Gani @ Naina Mohamed in their statements given on summons. Thus, their statements cannot be treated as obtained through coercion. Also, I find that the appellant has not responded to 11 summons issued by the DRI directing him to appear goes to say that something is fishy about the issue. The appellant should have appeared before the DRI and proved his innocence if he had any point. On the contrary, the Department (DRI) h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Section 121 of the Customs Act reads as under:- "121.Confiscation of sale-proceeds of smuggled goods:-Where any smuggled goods are sold by a person having knowledge or reason to believe that the goods are smuggled goods, thereof shall be liable to confiscation." 15. For invoking the provisions of Section 121, the following two pre-conditions have to be satisfied:- a. The sale proceeds should relate to smuggled goods. b. The sale should have been made by a person having knowledge or reason to believe that the goods are smuggled goods. 16. In the case on hand, there is absolutely no evidence to show that the said sum was relating to the sale proceeds of smuggled goods, which were sold by the petitioner, who was having knowledge or rea....