2000 (12) TMI 174

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....after dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 20,000/-, the appeal itself has been taken up for disposal. 2. The matrix of the case is that Shri Navneet Goswami of Agra was intercepted by the Officers of Customs at Muzaffarpur Railway Station on 19-2-1995 and on his deposition that he was carrying silver in his bag, he was taken to the Customs Office. On search, the said ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es that the said statement was obtained under pressure, coersion threat, and without administering to the appellant the mandatory warning embodied in Section 164(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and as such, the same is not admissible in evidence as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case reported in AIR 1988 SC 1883. He further submits that the Customs authorities did not acknowl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (N.T.), dated 15-1-1993, the burden to prove that the goods are not smuggled lies upon the appellant. The learned Consultant argues that the Adjudicatirg authority has misquoted the Notification. He argues that in the present case, the Department has failed to discharge the burden of proof. 2.2 The learned Consultant argues that inasmuch as the Show-cause Notice was not served on the appellant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....In this regard, he relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amba Lal v. Union of India and Others reported in 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1321 (S.C.) wherein it was held that if the Customs authorities had relied upon the statement made by the appellant at the time of search and seizure in order to reject his case but his request for copy of the statement and inspection of records was not grant....