TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 42
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bill of Entry No.151584 on 25.11.2004 for clearance. The CHA filed an application with ACC seeking permission to move the container from docks to M/s. Asian Terminals, CFS for destuffing under customs supervision. The container was moved towards the CFS but was stopped and parked less than half a kilometer from CFS. In the late evening/midnight, it was observed by the Customs Officers that two lorries had gained access to the premises and one of the lorry was parked back-to-back with the said container. The officers apprehended three person viz., (i) Shri Kunhi Mohammed alias Kunhippa; (ii) Shri P. V. Vijaykumar; and (iii) Shri Philip Varghese. However, one person who was later identified as Shri Mohamed Abdul Nasar, Proprietor of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner has dropped the proceedings against Shri Tissan J. Thachankary, M/s. Asian Terminals, Shri Mathew Philip and Smt. Ajitha Sajith. Aggrieved by the above order, the following appeals have been filed. Sl. No. Appeal No. Appellants 1 C/21/2007 KUNHI MOHAMMED @ KUNHIPPA 2 C/22/2007 MOHAMMED ABDUL @ NASAR BEERAN MOHAMMED 3 C/82/2007 PHILIP VARGHESE, 4 C/83/2007 P.V.VIJAYAKUMAR 5 C/84/2007 M.E.DHARMARAJAN 6 C/85/2007 T.MOHAMMED 2. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that while they are not making any appeal on merits of the case, they are aggrieved by the penalties imposed by the Commissioner (A). The learned counsel stated that the learned Commissioner has e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be considered to be an act to constitute that it was physically connected with the importation or preparation for import of the goods with knowledge on his part and consequently the provisions of Section 112(a) cannot be invoked against the appellant in the facts of this case." 2.1 Further, the learned counsel has submitted that though the drivers had no role in the attempt to smuggling of goods they have been penalized by the adjudicating authority. The penalties on drivers may be set aside. The learned counsel submitted that in view of the fact that Commissioner has not properly appreciated the distinction between the provisions of Section 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962, it is not proper on his part to impose penalty on all t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t held that confession statement made before the Customs Officer though retracted within six days is an admission and binding since Customs Officers are not Police Officers. Sl. No. Citations Gist of the Decisions 2 M/s. Bhana Khalpa Bhai Patel: 1997 (96) ELT211 (SC) The Supreme Court held that statement recorded under the Customs Act/ Central Excise Act, when found to be voluntary, not vitiated in any manner, admissible in evidence. 3 M/s. Shama Fireworks Industries The High Court held that the statement of partner recorded which was not retraced, rejected the plea of assessee that they had no capacity to manufacture so much of quantity, considering clandestine removal of goods and the way the assessee were opera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Who, in relation to any goods, does or omits to do any act which act or omission would render such goods liable to confiscation under Section 111, or abets the doing or omission of such an act, or (b) Who acquires possession of or is in any way 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." A reading of the provisions indicates very clearly that they are under different domains. Whereas subsection (a) envisages an action of commission or omission in relation to the goods which would render the goods liable for confiscation under Section 112 of C....