2018 (11) TMI 1534

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d and the order impugned therein dated 03.01.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Prev), Shillong has been set aside. 2. The background of the case in nutshell is as under: (i) Two trucks loaded with dry suprari (betel nuts) on 14.01.2016 were intercepted by custom officers. The drivers were asked to produce the documents which they failed, therefore, on the reasonable belief that the goods are illegally imported into India both the trucks were seized along with the goods. Shri Shyam Mondal and Shri Samir Ghosh appeared before the officer(s) claiming to be the owners of the said vehicles. (ii) Shri Rajesh Lapang of M/s Lapang Eco Products, Byrnihat, Meghalaya, had claimed ownership of the seized goods. On conclusion of the investi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of this order, failing which the confiscation shall be absolute. 37. I order confiscation of the vehicle bearing registration No.WB 41F -2694 valued at Rs. 10,00,000/- (rupees ten lakhs only) under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. I, however, give an option to the owner of the said vehicle to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 2,50,000/- (rupees two lakh fifty thousand only) in lieu of confiscation under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. Option is to be exercised within ten days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the confiscation shall be absolute. 38. I impose a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- (rupees five lakh only) on Shri Om Prakash Gupta under Section 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. 39. I im....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... it is that the revenue has not produced any evidence scientific or otherwise to prove foreign origin of the seized goods. Betel nuts are also available in India, therefore, pre-condition for confiscation is that the goods must have been of foreign origin and must have been imported to India in a manner other than as prescribed by Customs Act so as to fall within the ambit of Section 111 of the Act of 1962. 7. Another linked question is regarding the finding/opinion of the Commissioner of Customs, who had passed the order-in-original i.e. "absence of any genuine claimant/owner of the goods" when he could not find any genuine claimant/owner of the seized goods because after concluding that the revenue has failed to produce evidence regardin....