TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 384
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....24 and 26 Ms. Linda M.J, Advocate For Sl.No.30 - Ms. Vijitha V Advocates For Sl. No. 3 and 4 - Mr. Bindusaran, Consultant For Sl. No. 2,5,6,9,12,13,15,18,21,27,29,31 to 33-None Appeared For the Respondent : Ms. Arpitha. S, Joint Commissioner (AR) with Mr. Maneesh Akhoury, Asst. Commissioner (AR) ORDER PER : R BHAGYA DEVI : Briefly the facts are based on specific intelligence the officers of Air Intelligence Unit (AIU), Cochin International Airport, Nedumbassery, intercepted a passenger named Shri. Salim Melathu Makkar who arrived by Spice Jet flight No. SG 018 from Dubai to Cochin on 24.05.2015 at the exit gate of Customs arrival Hall of Cochin International Airport, Nedumbassery. Verification of the travel documents and passport of Shri. Salim Melathu Makkar showed that he was a frequent flyer and he had visited UAE five times in a span of four months during the year 2015. On enquiry, the passenger could not give any proper explanation for the purpose of these visits. No contraband or dutiable goods were recovered from his baggage or person. When questioned in the presence of two independent witnesses, the passenger admitted that he had concealed eight gold ba....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... argued that not only 13 kgs of gold that has been confiscated has been smuggled but on various previous occasions, the smuggling of gold has taken place which is evident from the statements, travel documents, seizure of cash etc. On the other hand, the learned counsels representing various appellants have put forth their arguments mainly alleging that the statements were drawn under threat and coercion and that there was no other evidence other than the statements and some of them have requested for cross-examination, which has been rejected. 3. The issue in all these appeals revolves around interception of the passenger Salim on 24.05.2015 and based on his confession, on the same day, the investigating officers confiscated 13 kgs. of gold from two ferry buses which were used to ferry the passengers from the aircraft to the airport. To understand the veracity of smuggling of gold, we need to examine the various modes of alleged smuggling undertaken by the appellants and the consequences of the same based on the evidences placed on record. According to the Revenue there were 3 major channels of smuggling as explained in the flow charts placed below. 4. According to the Revenu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anager Shinoy. K. Mohandas and Ramp Supervisor Bibin Scaria were alleged to have been involved in smuggling gold. One of them is a Customer Service Assistant from M/s. Jet Airways. The total quantity of gold smuggled in through this channel for this syndicate is estimated at 390 Kilograms. Channel - 1 1. M.V. Sharath Team Leader M/s. BWFS 2. M. Chandrakumar Team Leader M/s. BWFS 3. P.K. Prasannan Operator M/s. BWFS 4. K.M. Akhil Kumar Ramp Agent M/s. BWFS 5. N.C. Jithin Team Leader for Utility Hand, M/s. BWFS 6. Arun Balakrishnan Operator, M/s. BWFS 7. P.R. Jithin Ramp Agent, M/s. BWFS 8. Shefil A. B Customer Service Assistant, M/s. Jet Airways 7. The Channel-2 was co-ordinated by Faisal.P.A and Saifudheen, a former ground handling staff at CIAL, who is also the nephew of P.P.Ismail, a close aide of P.A. Noushad. Saifudheen recruited the services of following colleagues and acquaintances for smuggling gold out of the airport from the air side/tarmac area. The modus operandi was to walk through the exit gates, concealing the gold in their body. Here also six (6) are employees of BWFS and one of them is Cus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nuraj, Rafeek, T.K. Shamal 12 kgs. 3. Headed by Hakeem. Assisted by Shinuraj and Rimshad 5 kgs 4. Headed by Mujeeb. Assisted by Rafeek and Shamal T.K 9.2 kgs 5. Headed By Mohammed Sadiq,Suhaib, Sajeer, Aneer. Assisted by Shamal T.K 1.3 kgs 9. We find that in any smuggling activity of gold, there are financiers also who are involved in financing purchase of gold and then, the carriers who are involved in transporting the gold from various countries to India and then, we have the facilitators who facilitate in clearing the gold from the carriers to the exit gate of the airports and the persons who transport from the exit gate to the respective persons who are involved in smuggling and illegal activities. In the instant case, as per the Revenue, the financiers are K. B. Fazil, Ameer, Mujeeb, Saleem, Hakkim. The carriers and the facilitators are Saleem, Noushad, P.M. Ismail, Shinoy K. Mohandas, Bibin Scaria, Sudheer V.A, Jabin K. Basheer, K.B.Fazil, Yazir, Saifudheen and the employees of BWFS who facilitated the smuggling are Shinoy K. Mohandas, Bibin Scaria, Sharath, Chandrakumar, Akhil, Jithin N C, Arun, Jithin P R, Shefil, Baburaj. We find that at ti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s on imposition of penalty, only to the extent of 13 kgs. of gold being confiscated. 11.2. The second argument is that statements were taken under threat and coercion; hence, cannot be relied upon. The Commissioner has categorically rejected this on the ground that all of them were arrested and produced before the District Magistrate after medical examination. Moreover, the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied on by the Revenue are admissible, if allegations are corroborated with other evidences and hence, these factors have to be sustained wherever the statements have been corroborated with other evidences. We also find that many have not retracted the statements, hence, they cannot claim that there was a threat or coercion. 11.3. The third argument is regarding Section 138B of the Customs Act, 1962 stating that non examination of the statements during the adjudication proceedings vitiates the entire proceedings. This argument of the appellants is rejected for the simple reason that the jurisdictional Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore vs. Jyothi C. Jain and Ors. dated 13.08.2025 has observed as follows: "8. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n static. It was not for the Tribunal to have guesswork as to for what purposes the appellant wanted to cross-examine those dealers and what extraction the appellant wanted from them." 10. In light of the above judgment, it is only where the statement of a witness has been recorded and such statement is proposed to be relied upon against the assessee that, upon a request made by the assessee, the adjudicating authority is bound to afford an opportunity of cross-examination. In the present case, the Tribunal has erred in issuing a direction for cross-examination without recording any finding as to whether statements of the witnesses were recorded and relied upon against the assessees. The direction to permit cross-examination is, therefore, without any foundation and is unsustainable. Furthermore, since the Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for de novo consideration limited to cross-examination of the panch witnesses, it has failed to examine the other issues raised by the respondent-assessees." 11.4. Similarly, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi dated 13th February, 2026 CUSAA 7/2026 & CM APPL. 7007/2026 in the case of Hira Singh S/o SH. Ramdhari S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erned in respect of the statements made before Customs Authorities. Also, in the case of Surjeet Singh Chhabra Vs. UOI [1997 (89) ELT 646] the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that non-allowing of cross-examination is not violative of principles of natural justice. In the case of Jagdish Shankar Trivedi Vs. Collector of Customs, Kanpur [2006(194) ELT 290], the Principal Bench of Hon'ble CESTAT held "so far appellants whose statements were recorded under Section 108 of the said Act and who had clearly confessed to their involvement, there would be no violation of the principles of natural justice." Also relied on the following decisions: * Maya Mahal Industries Vs. CCE, Meerut [1995(80) E.L.T 118 (Tri New Delhi) * CC Hyderabad Vs ThallajaImpex [2012 (279) E.L.T 433(Tri Bang) * A.G.Corporation Vs. CC, New Delhi [2013 (287) E.L.T. 357 (Tri.- Del) 12.1. Thus, according to the revenue "The general dictum regarding cross- examination is that cross-examination in quasi-judicial proceedings is not a matter of right of the noticee and a decision regarding the grant of cross-examination is to be arrived by the adjudicating authority depending upon the facts and circum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the walkie talkie which was used for communication and the canoe with an outboard motor which was used for bringing the gold from the main vessel to the shore, and the number of cars and motor bikes, it would be futile to expect the adjudicating authority to accept the claim that statements have been recorded under force and they are not voluntary. 36. However, while arriving at the gravity of offence committed by each person who is a party to these proceedings, I have taken into account not the entire portion of the statement given by them but only such of those details which can be confirmed by some form of corroborative evidence. I have also gone by the preponderance of probabilities and accepted circumstantial evidence since in these types of activities of smuggling it is not always possible to catch the culprits red-handed in the actual act of smuggling. 1. Accordingly, I find that K.P. Abdul Majeed the kingpin of the entire operation assisted by various persons in some capacity or the other. No statement could be recorded from Abdul Majeed and even when he appeared once before the Assistant Collector of Customs, S.C.P. Division, Calicut, he never choose to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ose except for delaying the proceedings. Thus, considering the evidences, we find that the rejection of cross-examination is justified. 14. Out of these 33 appellants, one of the appellant Shinoy K. Mohandas who was the Duty Manager of BWFS during the relevant period and all the co-accused in the gold smuggling were employees of BWFS and the statements of various employees when corroborated with the statement of Shinoy K. Mohandas, it emerges as to how the employees were used to facilitate the gold smuggling. We find that in his statement dated 13.06.2015, he had specifically stated that P.A. Noushad (no appeal has been filed) was known to him very well, who introduced him to Baburaj Scaria (no appeal has been filed) and also stated that they used to communicate to each other and based on their directions, gold was collected from the passengers and transported to the persons concerned outside the airport. The mobile numbers have been specifically mentioned and there is no retraction, as such, on these Call Data Records. The retraction statement dated 30.07.2015 filed by the appellant only submits that he was being harassed and beaten by the Custom Officers and hence, out of coer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inance, Government of India. He submitted another representation dated 19.11.2015, written in Malayalam before the Joint Secretary, COFEPOSA, New Delhi'. '17. The sponsoring authority's proposals to detain the persons covered by the impugned preventive detention proceedings under the COFEPOSA Act were on the basis of the facts and factors, to be treated as allegations, generating the grounds for preventive detention of those persons and available as part of the grounds of detention as communicated to each among the detenus. They are as follows: iii. Shinoy Κ. Mohandas coordinated the smuggling operations among airport staff and had recruited Bibin Scaria into the gang and they induced other staff to operate with them. Evidence of purchase of property worth Rs.40 lakhs and deposits worth Rs.24 lakhs was obtained. He smuggled approximately 400 kgs of gold through Airport for the syndicate and had also obtained remuneration to the tune of Rs.70 lakhs. Material evidence showed that he had contacts with Salim Melathu Makkar, Fazil K.B. and Yasir Ibhu Muhammed. viii. Bibin Scaria was involved in smuggling, abetting smuggling and transporting of go....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er than fifteen days, from the date of detention. That provision also prescribes the limits as to time within which such communication has to be made. 23. On the basis of the materials which have been admittedly communicated, therefore examined, is needs what to as to be whether the materials communicated included the grounds on which the detention order has been made and whether those materials would enable the detenu to make a representation, making of which is the legitimate right of the detenu in terms Article 22(5). 24. It is argued on behalf of the detenus that the order of detention issued through the Joint Secretary to Government of India, who was specially empowered under Section 3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act is one which does not disclose the grounds of detention inasmuch as the contents of that order are an admixture of apparently different limbs and components of various clauses of sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the COFEPOSA Act and there is no specific indicator on the face of the order of detention as to what is actually meant by the detaining authority and the said order is issued in such a manner as the real import of the intention the detaining author....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bility to understand the contents of the detention order and the grounds of detention as also the contents of the materials served on them in English and Malayalam. A variation in the form in which translation is expressed does not vitiate the requirement to communicate the order and grounds of detention. See for support Devji vallabhbhai Tandel v. Administrator of Goa, Daman & Diu and Another [(1982) 2 SCC 222]. Any defect in the order or its communication, including translations does not vitiate the order when the files, on our examination, bespeak due application of mind by the detaining authority and the availability and consideration of the materials relied on by the sponsoring authority. For further support, see Kamarunnissa v. Union of India and Another [(1991) 1 SCC 128], which precedent also lays down the principle that non-mentioning of the different clauses of Section 3 (1) of the COFEPOSA Act does not render the detention order invalid. 26. When the detenus are shown to be conversant with English and Malayalam languages, it would be an imprudent judicial exercise, if we were to hold that the translations of the documents into Malayalam should be examined in suc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the court in a criminal trial. If the formalities prescribed by the Constitution and the COFEPOSA Act have been complied with, there would be no further examination by the Court, on an application seeking interference with preventive detention. In support these principles, see Ramesh v. D.M. [AIR 1986 SC 315], State of Gujarat v. Adam [AIR 1981 SC 2005] and Abdulla Kunhi v. Union of India [(1991) 1 SCC 476]. 28. Having examined the original records, and the materials as were communicated to each of the detenus along with the detention orders and the grounds of detention, we are of the view that the orders of detention have been issued on the basis of materials which are not extraneous to the purpose of statutory provisions which have been invoked by the detaining authority and the sponsoring authority. No plea of absence of due application of mind is available on the materials in the cases in hand. 29. Having noticed that adequacy or sufficiency of relevant materials is not a matter for consideration in writ jurisdiction dealing with preventive detention, many of the arguments raised by the petitioners, including on the alleged non-availability of certain facto....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... It is also pertinent to note that the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala took note of all the evidences and categorically held that they are satisfied based on the evidences placed on record that the detention orders under the COFEPOSA Act,1974 are valid. The Hon'ble High Court also observed that 'we are of the view that the orders of detention have been issued on the basis of materials which are not extraneous to the purpose of statutory provisions which have been invoked by the detaining authority and the sponsoring authority'. 14.4. Ms. Linda M.J, Learned Counsel submitted that except for alleging that statements have been taken under threat, there are no other evidences to disprove the fact that Shinoy K. Mohandas is the Duty Manager of BWFS in-charge of the buses that ferry the passengers and it is on record that the confiscated gold was found in these buses and also the use of Hyundai car which was owned by him, which was used to transport the smuggled gold is not challenged with cogent evidences. Moreover, those implicated him and worked in committing this offence have not filed any appeal nor challenged the impugned order. The call data records placed by the Revenue along wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....P(Cr) No.496 of 2015 dated 7.12.2015." 15.1 Also, the Hon'ble High Court noted that Yasir Ibnu Muhammed knows English and Malayalam and he is a Postgraduate in Business Management and had graduated from the University of Bedfordshire, United Kingdom and the observations of the Hon'ble High Court already reproduced at Para 22 clearly upholds the detention orders under the COFEPOSA Act, 1974. The Revenue has also placed on record the tickets booked for Yasir Ibnu Muhammed but paid by P.A. Noushad which also proves the fact that Yasir Ibnu Muhammed and P. A. Noushad were involved in these activities. 15.2 Ms. Vijitha. V, Learned Counsel on behalf of Yasir submitted that the Appellant requested for cross-examination of key witnesses and an opportunity for personal hearing, however, without granting the same, the impugned order came to be passed in violation of principles of natural justice. It is stated that the order also heavily relies on alleged Call Data Records (CDRs) and WhatsApp communications, which are neither duly certified as per Section 138C of the Customs Act, 1962, nor admissible in law. The Appellant was under preventive detention under COFEPOSA from 16.11.2015 to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the order will not yield any result except to delay the proceedings. With regard to Section 138B of the Customs Act, 1962, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CC, Bangalore vs. Jyothi C. Jain and Ors. (supra) has categorically held that only in case of prosecution cases, it could be invoked. Moreover, in this case, the evidences placed on record by the authorities concerned has been found to be sufficient for detaining the appellant under the COFEPOSA Act, 1974. However, we find that the Commissioner in the impugned order observed as follows: 'The exact quantum of gold smuggled using this channel cannot be determined with absolute certainty given the secrecy of the operations as well as by the fact that no documentary evidence was left behind by the members of the smuggling syndicate. The quantum of gold that has been smuggled using the channel wherein Yasir was involved was arrived at based on statements of other persons who were involved in smuggling in the same channel. It was Shinoy.K. Mohandas and Baburaj Hassan who revealed that Yasir Ibnu Mohammed sent photographs of the carrier passengers through WhatsApp for the purpose of identification. This was r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, hence the impugned order cannot be sustained. Further, it is also submitted that though the recovery and confiscation of gold was only 13 kgs., the penalties are imposed on large quantities of gold said to have been smuggled only based on the statements cannot be sustained. 16.2. In all the above cases, the Commissioner observed that the allegation that the statements were taken under threat, torture, inducement, etc., lacks merit, since they were all arrested and produced before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) (Economic Offence) on the same day, after medical examination, following which they were remanded to judicial custody. The medical report of the competent officer makes no mention of any injuries on them and had given a clean chit of health. When produced before the ACJM, Ernakulam, no allegation of torture or coercion by the investigating officers was made. These allegations can only be considered as an afterthought and an attempt to evade the consequences that emerge from their actions as detailed in their statements. It is further stated that the validity of statements recorded under Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 as evidence in proceedings in Cust....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt to make the confessional statement irrelevant for the purposes of a proceeding in a criminal case or quasi criminal case....." Similarly, in K.P. Abdul Majeed Vs. Commissioner of Customs Cochin [2014(309) ELT 671] Division Bench of Kerala High Court had held that: "It is clear that confession statement of co-accused can be taken as evidence. As far as retraction statement is concerned, it is for the person who claims that the retraction has been made genuinely to prove that the statement was obtained under duress, force, coercion etc.,. otherwise the material indicates that they were given voluntarily. When the statute permit such statements to be the basis of finding of guilt even as far as co accused is concerned, there is no reason to depart from the said view". 16.3. We find that except Sreevalsan C.K, all others have retracted their statements. However, as observed by the Commissioner, when all these persons were taken into judicial custody and medical examination was undertaken at that point of time, there was no allegation of torture or coercion and therefore, these retractions have to be considered only as an 'afterthought' as is held by the Commissioner i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tatements confessed to have smuggled gold by carrying the gold out of the airport premises having accessed to the restricted areas of the airport premises. 16.6. In all these cases, since their retractions as is held by the Commissioner are only an 'afterthought' and no cross-examination has been asked by them, therefore, taking into consideration their statements and the fact that only 13 kgs. of gold have been recovered, we do not find any reason to disagree with the observations of the Commissioner in view of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Rajendra Prakash Pawar Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Mangalore 2020 (374) E.L.T. 10 (Kar.) dated 11.03.2020 wherein it was observed that "10. Insofar as, merits of the case is concerned, it would clearly emerge from the orders of the original authority as affirmed by the appellate authority the statement of appellant recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act penalty under Section 112(a) came to be imposed. In fact, whatsapp messages exchanged between the noticees including the appellant herein, which formed part and parcel of the show cause notice and adjudication order, it came to be held tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... K. Basheer since not retracted his statement, the same is valid and moreover, the frequent travels by both of them especially when Jabin K. Basheer was on duty proves the fact that they were the carriers of the smuggled gold. It is shown that out of 38 times that Jabin K. Basheer was on duty, they have travelled 31 times and also there has been no travel when Jabin K. Basheer was on leave. It is also brought on record that on arrest of P. A. Noushad, the kingpin of the syndicate, the travels were stopped. The fact that both of them did not appear for recording any statement and did not cooperate with the investigating authorities goes to prove that they had no substance to retract the evidences placed by the investigating authorities. Having not given a statement, their request for cross-examination cannot be entertained, moreover when Jabin K. Basheer has not filed an appeal nor has retracted his statement. The travel details are listed below: 18.1. The Learned Counsel Mrs. Linda on behalf of Riyas, Rabins, Abins and Ajins submitted that no opportunity was provided to cross-examine co-noticees Shri Jabin K. Basheer, Shri Sudheer V, and Shri P.A. Noushad. It is further stated t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... period. He has in his statement stated that Rabins, Riyas, Abins and Ajins were carriers, who smuggled gold from Dubai to Kochi Airport who used to leave the gold in the flush tank of the toilet in the immigration hall which was collected by Jabin K. Basheer and delivered outside the airport. It is also stated that the gold was concealed in the AC vent in the toilet and all the above persons were regularly involved in smuggling of the gold. Jabin K. Basheer was also detained under COFEPOSA Act, 1974 alleging against him that he was involved in smuggling of 1,500 kgs of gold for P. A. Noushad through Cochin Airport. The modus operandi was to have the smuggled gold being carried by the carrier passengers into the toilet of the immigration hall and to conceal the same in the air-conditioning duct and thereafter, the same was carried outside the airport by Jabin K. Basheer by concealing in his body and to transport the gold into the car. These materials placed on record were upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala and accordingly, dismissed the writ petitions filed by the petitioner Jabin Basheer. In this back ground, we do not find any reason to doubt the evidentiary value of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alleged smuggling of 44 kgs. of gold. 19.1. Similarly, Ameer Mamikutty as per the revenue also admitted his role in the smuggling of gold through Cochin International Airport in his statements and statement of Ameer Mamikutty corroborates with the statements of other accused in this case. It is stated that Ameer Mamikutty has denied that 3067.380 gms of gold ornaments recovered from his shop were made from smuggled gold but failed to produce any evidence detailing the purchase of the ornaments or the gold used in making the ornaments. In the absence of any such evidence, the revenue held that the ornaments are made from smuggled gold, since as per the statement of Ameer Mamikutty, out of the 5 kgs of gold smuggled, he sold 1.8 kgs of gold and retained 3.2kgs of gold to make ornaments and after taking into account the wastage, 3.2 kgs of gold when converted, results into approximately 3 kgs of gold ornaments, the same was seized under Mahazar and the Commissioner in the impugned order confiscated the same. 19.2. The Learned Counsel, Mrs. Maya Menon in the case of Prasanan P.K, it is submitted that the entire allegation is based on statements and hence, cannot be taken as concl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eration by abetting smuggling of 5 kgs. of gold out of the airport along with his accomplices. 19.5. The Learned Counsel, (Ms. Maya Menon) contented that the entire all allegations are based on unsustainable evidences. It is stated that other than statements there is no evidence to prove that the jewellery was made out of the smuggled good and also the seizure and confiscation of the vehicle Toyota Innova car is illegal and unsustainable. Relying upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case Hindustan Steel versus State of Orissa 1978 (2) ELT J159(S.C.) and AB Jiwani versus Collector of Customs 1990 (47) ELT 161 (S.C). It is submitted that the penalties are unjustified. Also relied on Commissioner of Customs (Imports) Vs. Sainul Abideen Neelam and Another (2014) 300 ELT 342 (Mad.). 19.6. The Revenue only based on the statements of Ameer Mamikutty and other co-accused has held that he financed gold smuggling and received the smuggled gold with the help of Fazil K.B. and other carriers. Though Ameer Mamikutty has denied that the 3067.380 gms of gold ornaments recovered from his shop were made from smuggled gold this plea has been rejected on the ground no evidence regardi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere alleged to have been involved in facilitating gold smuggling. 21.1. We find that Sharath.M.V had replied to the show-cause notice vide his reply dated 22.01.2016 denying all the allegations and also on 26.10.2016 advocate Mrs. Laya Mary Joseph appeared before the Commissioner and hence, the claim of the appellant having not given any opportunity is nullified. We also find that their retraction was filed after two months which was rejected by the Revenue. Sharath.M.V in his statement dated 08.06.2015 has stated that he was a Team Leader and involved in loading and unloading cargo baggage from flight. He also stated that he was on duty of Spice Jet flight and Shinoy had given him and Chandra Kumar M one gold bar each covered in a black tape, which was carried to the bathroom and concealed in their shoes and entered to the International Terminal departure through the staff gate. On exit, they entered the Hyundai i10 car which belongs to Shinoy K. Mohandas and placed it in the car. He also admits that he had carried 8 kgs of gold, for which Rs.2,00,000/- remuneration was given which was later retracted after two months. We find that 8 kgs of gold (Rs.1,88,40,000/-) which was con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ithin P R (BWFS employee) all are also alleged as carriers/ facilitators without any evidences to corroborate the same. None appeared for the above appellants. Except for their statements nothing is on record to prove or corroborate their involvement, hence, we do not find any cogent reasons to justify imposition of penalty on them. 23. Baburaj K. Hassan, another employee of BWFS in his statement dated 12.06.2015 has clearly admitted that he introduced Shinoy. K.M to Fazil, P.A. Noushad and Yasir and that Fazil was his classmate in school and has given a detailed analysis how the smuggling of gold was undertaken. Having not retracted his statement, the appellant cannot allege that he was forced to give a statement and we find that the appellant has not retracted his statement. Having admitted to the offence in his statement to the offence corroborated by others who have not filed an appeal before us stands justified. Accordingly, the allegations of being a facilitator is upheld; however, taking into consideration the fact that only 13 kgs gold was confiscated the penalty is reduced from Rs.30,00,000/- to Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Only). The confiscation of the Maruti Swift....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wed that during the same period Noushad had started smuggling gold through Cochin Airport. It is further stated that the frequent travels undertaken by Ismail to Dubai and payments for the same, were made by P.A. Noushad and his brother P.A. Faisal arranged tickets for carrier passengers to bring gold to India. From the CDRs it is stated that Ismail (Mob No.9497028650) had frequent contacts with Noushad P A in his Mobile number 9605483375 which used by Noushad but found to be in a fictitious name and there were no calls from the number 9605483375 after the search of Noushad's residence on 25.5.15. Further it is stated that P.P. Ismail had complained about ill treatment to Hon'ble Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offence) when he was produced before the authority after his arrest, and FIR was registered by the police authorities, who after enquiring into the same, found that the allegations were false and referred the matter for closure. 25.1. None appeared however from their appeal records it is seen that the appellant submitted that the statements of Ansal Siraj and Lal cannot be accepted as there is no other material evidence other than statements. Based on the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at role of Nibin K. Basheer in smuggling of gold as held by the Commissioner is to be sustained. Accordingly, we uphold the penalty of Rs.25,00,000/- and the confiscation of the vehicle along with the redemption fine. 27. In view of the above discussions and observations, Customs Appeal Nos.20312, 20555; 20599; 20600; 20601; 20629; 20631; 20632; 20639; 20641; 20652; 20660; 20721; 21133; 21458/2017 are allowed; Customs Appeal Nos. 20630; 20633; 20634; 20640; 20647; 20648; 20649; 20650; 20651; 20657; 20658; 20659; 20661; 20701; 21130; 21596/2017 are disposed of; and Customs Appeal Nos. 20628; 20748/2017 are rejected. (Order was pronounced in Open Court on 06.02.2026.) ============= Document 1 II. FLOW CHARTS CHANNEL 1 Jan 2014 - 390 kgs 20. 1 3. Shinoy (BWFS Duty Manager) Meet Baburaj IBWFSI 2. Naushad 39.Yasir Baburaj introduces Shinoy Brother 38.Faisal Friend Friend 29. Ashique Shanavas 37.Fazil Brother- in - law Carrier 1.Salim BWFS Hides gold in ferry bus 20.Baburaj BWFS 3. Shinoy 4. Bibin Scaria (introduced by Shinoy) 15.Arun Balakrishnan 6.Chandra Kumar 11.Akhil Kumar 5.Sharath All other....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....164 16-04-2014 stern Noushad Western 3. Noushad Adhil |Molayil K Shabe |Kunjumuhammed -14 |COK-SH 165 |16-04-2014 Noushad Western usnad waste Moolayil K Shabeer |Kunjumuhammed 13-05-14 |DXB-CO , 10184 |22-04-2014 Noushad Western |3. 1. Noushad Putheth 2. Noushad Shij achat Puthack. Noushad Fathima Afr Noushad Adhil Ali 26-04-1 DXB-COK 10211 28-04-2014 Noushad Western Ismail P P 30-04-14 |COX-DAD 11 10212 28-04-2014 Noushad Western |Ismail P P 15-05-14 |DXB-COK 12 10251 07-05-2014 Noushad Western Leenas TA 08-05-14 BOM-COKE 13 10262 09-05-2014 Noushad Western Noushad PÃ… N 10-05-14 KTM-COK 4 10963 10263 09-05-2014 09-05-2014 Noushad Western Noushad w Faisal K 10-05-14 |KTM-CO 15 noen 10280 13-05-2014 13-05-2014 Noushad Western Noushad Ismail P 7-05-14 |DXB-CO 16 - 10321 0. 05. 2014 23-05-2014 Nousha Noushad Western Ismail? Ismail PP 29-05-14 | COK-DXB 10326 26-05-2014 Noushad Western |Ismail 22-06-14 DXB-COK 18 10354 |31-05-2014 Noushad Western Ismail P P 01-06-14 | DXB-COK 19 10381 10381 07-06-2014 |07-06-2014 Noushad Noushad Western Ismail P P 1-06-14 4 6 COK-DXB 10461 24-06-2014 Noushad Western |mayil P -06-14 | C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... DKB-CO 17-12-2014 Noushad 18-12-14 | COK-DXB 123 27-12-2014 Faisal Noushad Faisal PA 28-12-14 |COK-SH 42 11321 27-01-2015 Faisal Noushad Shanavas CS 7-01-15 COK-SHI |COK |COK-SHI 44 132) 11332 29-01-2015 Faisal Noushad Shanavas Khamza -15 3 02-02-2015 02-02-2015 Faisal Noushad d Shanavas CS 02-02-15 |CO COK-SHI 46 Faisal Noushad Hashim P Basheer |11 1358 |02-02-201 02-02-2015 |Faisal Noushad |Hashim P Basheer 48 48 11390 11 200 02-01 07-02-2015 1. Faisal Noushad IS Ashik Al NA Achik Ali NA 03-15 SHJ-COK. 49 1 391 07-02-2015 Faisal Noushad shad= 2. Shameer 9-02-15 COK-SHJ 50 1417 |13-02-2015 Faisal Noushad Puthethmoglavil Alikunju Puthetombola) Faisal 13-02-15 COK-SH 51 11419 |13-02-2015 Faisal Noushad shad Muhammed Nash Pummer 15-02-15 |COK-D 5) 1420 14-02-2015 Faisal Noushad Muhammed Nas Pummer 10-03-15 DXB-C 11448 |19-02-2015 Faisal Noushad 1. Hashim P Basheer > Ebrahim Najas 20-02-15 | 5 COK |COK-S 11449 |19-02-2015 Faisal Noushad 1. Hashim P Basheer Salim 16-03-15 5 |S+ SHI-COK 3511480 2-2014 Faisal Noushad Fico Melathu Makar 5 1506 27.02.2015 15 |COK-SHJ 11511 |28-02-2015 Faisal Noushad Neu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....03-2015 Faisal Noushad Shabeer KM 1. Ashik Ali NA 06-04-15 MAA-DXB 75 11685 04-04-2015 Faisal Noushad 2. Mytheen Aslam 3. Hashim PR 1. Ashik All NA 3 Mutheen Ac 02-05-15 DX8-COM 76 11686 04-04-2015 Faisal Noushad 3. Hashim P 8 1. Faisal 8-04-15 COK-SH; 2. Shameer CS 16-2015 |Faisal Noushad 7 5 06-04-2015 |Faisal Nousna Nassim PM 01 07-04-2015 Faisal Noushad chomeer CS 03-05-15 |SHJ-COR 78 11701 elim M Makar 1. Faisal PA 12.06. 2. Brevikunju 2015 CORON 18-05- 768 22-04-2015 Faisal Noushad 3. Fitha Noure 81 Aslam Mytheen 24-04-15 |COK- 11772 23-04-2015 Faisal Noushad 4. Saidfu Mohammed 82 > Aslam Mytheen SHI- COK sal Noushad 23-04-2015 Faisal N didu Monamm dhameer C Saidull 15 COK-SHI al Noushad 84 1177 24-04-2015 Faisal Noushad Mohammedkunju .Jamal P Perumatto Subier MM 1793 02-05-2015 Faisal Noushad COK-S 35 1828 04-05-2015 Faisal Noushad 05:15 lim M M 15 SHI-COK 14032 04-05-2015 Falsa Nous SHI-COR 89 beer M K 27 04-05-2015 Enical Nouch SHI-CO lim M M 11842 |05-05-2015 Faisal Nousha -05-15 |TRV him PB 91 him DA 31-05.15 | SHI-CO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lo - guessdie-30 days. LAST OUTSTANDING Received by Rs reative Tours & Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd. KMP Building, Post Office Junction, Muvattupuzha - 686 661 Tel : 0485-3243056, Email : mizsales @creativeholidaysincia.com, Web Dice No. ..... CUSTOM HOUSE Date: 25 May , KREDIT REQUISITION TO 11947 COK MIRROR 40 Noushad Weiter 176 8935 185882 KEK 25 MUHAMMED PXB KOK 5035 3300 TOTAL hereby confirm and agree that M/s. Creative Tours & Travels (Incia) Pvt. Ltd. shall have the by confirm and agree that Ms. Creative Tours To charge interest O 2% per month on Is exceeding 30 day LAST OUTSTANDING .Tours & Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd. KAP Building, Post Office Junction, Mavantupuzha - 686 661 KMP Building. Post Office -Jureljan. Tel : 0485-3243066, Mi com Web : www.cre sued by: 20h LAI.C UPCJUNTEKOCHT DE CUSTCHE PREVE CREDIT REQUISITION 10 12-2 RMT of Noushad washer rs & Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd. cative Tours & Travels ( Reissue- Carrier Date Cias Amount Ps 4 902 15fes K, 64 58 458 YASIR IBNUMU HAMMED OKB TOTAL +000/ -. Approved by : Accountant rights which shal be binding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s @creativeholidaysindia com; NOUSHAD WESTERN UNION HOUSHAD WESTERN UNION Due Date : 03/02/2019 MUVATTUPUZMA CR 11375 Basic Taxes 599 992018953 2940.00 Ta o.E. " " Created By: admin est require any official signature. l af. c CREATIVE TOURS & TRAVELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD INVIATA Tel. - 31 485 3243066; Email mizsales@creativeholidaysing NOUSHAD WESTERN UNION Date : 05 / Date : 05/09/201 UVATTUPUZHA 10758 Basic Ticket No. HCG Passenger Name 1.08 21500.00 27 176 52701560 D 27333.00 K/DX8 EK Less Handling Charges TOTAL IHR. Igurty eight thousand als hundred enty. not require any oficial sure. Document 3 S.No Name Sex Date of Birth Passport No. Na Flight No Flight Schedule CHAKKARAKKATTIL ABOOBACKER AJINS M 10/05/1987 J0002220 INDI IX-435 10/09/11 20:1 2 CHAKKARAKKATTIL ADOOBACKER AJINS M 10/05/1907 J0002220 INDIA 1X-435 02/05/13 04:40 3 C CHAKKARAKKATTIL ABOOBACKER AJINS M 10/05/1907 J0002220 INDIA EK-533 20/07/13 04:20 AINS CHAKKARAKKATTIL ADOOBACKER AJINS M 10/05/1907 J0002220 INDIA A1-933 28/07/13 10:2 CHAKKARAKKATTIL ABOOBACKER JING M 10/05/1987 J0002220 INDIA EK-531 05....