TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 147
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cted for the offences under Section 132 and Sections 135(1) (a) r/w 135(1)(a)(i), 135(1)(b) r/w 135(1)(b)(i) and 135(1) (c) r/w 135 (1)(c)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, as amended r/w Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 (as amended) and r/w Schedule I of Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 of the Customs Act, 1962 and sentenced as follows: Offence under Section Sentence imposed 132 of Customs Act To undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. 135(1) (a) r/w 135(1)(a)(i), 135(1)(b) r/w 135(1)(b)(i) and 135(1) (c) r/w 135 (1) (c)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, as amended r/w Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 19....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (ii) It is the further case of the prosecution that thereafter summons was issued under Section 108 of the Customs Act and the petitioner admitted that he was looking after the concern though his wife was the Proprietor; that he had packed the granite cobble stones for export to Malaysia, which was certified by the Central Excise officials and that he was not aware as to how the red sander wooden logs were stuffed in. (iii) A show cause notice was issued under Section 124 of the Customs Act, and on adjudication, the Commissioner of Customs, confiscated the red sander wooden logs and imposed a penalty of Rs. 10 Lakhs on the petitioner and also penalty of Rs. 2,50,000/- against all other accused; Thereafter, a complaint was lodged again....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar incidents have been reported wherein, the containers were tampered during transportation from the factory to the Port; that is the reason why the Central Excise officials are made to certify at the factory premises; and that conviction for Sections 135(1)(a), 135(1)(b) and 135(1)(c) of the Customs Act, is not justified and even if the allegations are accepted to be true, the petitioner would be liable only under Section 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act. He would submit that in any case, since the alleged occurrence took place in the year 2005 and the petitioner is now aged 71 years, the sentence imposed may be reduced. 5. Mr.M.P.Kumar, learned Special Public Prosecutor for Customs, per contra submitted that the scope of revision is limite....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nces under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act. 9. The punishment provided for Section 132 of the Customs Act is imprisonment for a term of six months, or with fine or with both. The punishment provided for the offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act, which is Evasion of duty or prohibitions, where the offences relates to any goods, to which Section 123 of the Customs Act, applies and the market value exceeds one lakh of rupees, is upto seven years of imprisonment. It is not the case of the prosecution that the prohibited goods viz., red sander wooden logs is covered under Section 123 of the Customs Act. The punishment therefore, would be as provided under Section 135 (1)(ii), which provides for a maximum period of three years. ....