TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (3) TMI 762
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2 was boarding a flight for Hong Kong, a search was carried out and respondent no.2 was found to be in possession of foreign currency amounting to little over Indian Rs. 19.00 lacs. The foreign currency was confiscated by the order of the adjudicating officer and a penalty of Rs. 5.00 lac was also imposed. The appeal filed was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals). In terms of the impugned order, however, the order in so far as directs absolute confiscation of the currency has been set aside and the foreign currency has been released on payment of a redemption fine and penalty amounting to Rs. 4.00 lacs and Rs. 3.25 lacs respectively. There is no dispute that this amount has been paid. The first contention advanced by learned counse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the commencement of section 40 of the Finance Act, 1984, against which an appeal has not been preferred before such commencement and could have been, if the said section had not come into force, preferred after such commencement, to the Appellate Tribunal. (1A) The Commissioner of Customs may, if he is of the opinion that an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 128A is not legal or proper, direct the proper officer to make an application on his behalf to the Central Government for revision of such order. (2) An application under sub-section(1) shall be made within three months from the date of the communication to the applicant of the order against which the application is being made; Provided ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ven notice to show cause against it within one year from the date of the order sought to be annulled or modified. (6) Where the Central Government is of opinion that any duty of customs has not been levied or has been short-levied, no order levying or enhancing the duty shall be made under this section unless the person affected by the proposed order is given notice. A reading of the said section would show that there is no specific mentioning of the requirement of notice to the department. Here the respondent would be the department because the revisionary jurisdiction has been exercised on an application of the person aggrieved by the order. There can be no doubt that this does not preclude the authority exercising revis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubt penal in nature, absolute confiscation has not been held to be justified in a number of cases. The revisionary jurisdiction has also taken into consideration the subsequent developments over a period of time of liberalisation specially in matters of foreign exchange and, thus, came to the conclusion that it is not necessary to absolutely confiscate the amount and the imposition of the redemption fine and penalty would suffice. In my considered view the aforesaid findings do not call for interference and exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Before parting with the matter, it may be noticed that interim orders were initially granted in favour of the petitioner but thereafter vacated on 20.3.2003 w....