COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Vs. JAGDISH PRASHAD SONI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of all the above captioned appeals which have been preferred by the Revenue against the common order -in -appeal dated 30 -10 -2002 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) had dropped the proceedings against the respondents under Sections 121, 118, 112 and 115(2) of the Customs Act.

(2.) ON 15 -4 -1996, the Customs Officers intercepted one Maruti Van in the area of Jaipur -Bikaner Road which was being driven by Shri Hari Prashad Modi, respondent, and Shri Satya Narain Soni, respondent, was sitting by his side. On search of the car, Indian currency of Rs. 2,73,750/ -was recovered and both the respondents could not offer any plausible explanation for the possession of the same. On interrogation, Shri Satya Narain Soni, respondent, admitted that the Indian currency recovered, was the sale proceeds of the foreign origin gold biscuits which he purchased from Ramanand Soni, respondent, and sold to Shri Sampat Lal Soni, respondent. The statements of other respondents were also recorded. The recovered Indian currency was seized on the belief that that being the sale proceeds of the foreign origin gold, was liable to be confiscated under the Customs Act. On completion of investigation, show cause notice was served on all the respondents proposing confiscation of the seized currency and imposition of penalties on them under the various provisions of the Customs Act, as detailed above. The confiscation of the car was also proposed in that show cause notice. After getting the reply to the show cause notice and affording hearing to the respondents, the adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings through the Order -in -Original. That order had been affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) through the impugned order.

(3.) NONE has come present on behalf of the respondents. They have requested for decision on merits. I have heard the learned SDR and gone through the record. From the record, it is evident that the Department had heavily relied upon the confessional statement made by Shri Satya Narain Soni, respondent, recorded on 15 -4 -1996 wherein he allegedly admitted that the Indian currency seized from the car was sale proceeds of the foreign origin gold biscuits which he purchased from his co -respondent, Shri Ramanand Soni, and sold the same to Shri Sampat Lal Soni, respondent. But that statement had not been accepted by both the authorities below on the ground that he retracted the same immediately thereafter on 17 -4 -1996 when he was produced before the Judicial Magistrate and that there was no corroboration to his statement. Both the authorities below have recorded concurrent findings that the Department has failed to prove that there was a sale and that too was of the smuggled gold biscuits and that the currency recovered was the sale proceeds of the smuggled gold. They have dropped the proceedings for these very reasons by following the ratio of the law laid down by the Tribunal in the case of Ram Chandra v. CCE, Jaipur, 1992 (60) E.L.T. 277 (T).