TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (10) TMI 117
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e reasonable belief that the goods were liable to be confiscated under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act as the same had been brought into India illegally from Nepal in contravention of the provisions of Notification No. 09/96-Cus., dated 22-1-96 issued under Section 11 of the Customs Act read with Section 3 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. The jeep was also seized as being liable to confiscation under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act. On 26-9-97 an application was filed for provisional release of the jeep on behalf of one Durgesh Prasad. He stated therein that though the jeep was registered in his name, it was in the custody of the appellant Navdip Kumar, his sister's son, for last over two and half years and h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....visions of the Customs Act and accordingly ordered for their confiscation. He also imposed personal penalty in terms of Section 122 of the Act on the persons named in the order. So far as the jeep is concerned, giving benefit of doubt, he gave the owner option to pay fine, in lieu of confiscation, as redemption fine quantified at Rs. 15,000/- as per provisions of Section 115(2) of the Customs Act. Such option was to be exercised within one month of receipt of the copy of the order. Durgesh Prasad was also informed about the order. 4. The appellant filed the connected writ petition, CWJC No. 8918/2001, for a direction upon the respondents to release the jeep and pay him damage suffered by the jeep in the meantime. The learned Single Judge n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant was not aware of the proposed sale. It was on his request that an order was passed on 5-2-98 for provisional release of the vehicle to which also the appellant did not respond. He cannot say that he was unaware of the events. The vehicle having remained under open sky, exposed to the vagaries of nature, if the authorities decided to sell it, at a public auction, treating it to be a perishable item, lest it would become a junk, the decision cannot be said to be arbitrary. Even if it be accepted that the appellant was not aware of the proposed sale, the vehicle having been sold, he cannot get release of the vehicle because no such order can be passed in absence of the auction purchaser. The appellant was at least expected to make h....