(1.) REVENUE filed this appeal against the Order -in -Appeal No. CC(A)242 -243/08 dated 22.07.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi.
(2.) THE relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondents were engaged in the business of trading of electronic components like ICs, transistors, capacitors, resistance and diodes, etc. having their shop at Old Lajpat Rai Market, Delhi. On 17.05.2005, the Customs Officers visited the respondent's shop and found integrated circuits and other electrical components of foreign origin valued at Rs. 10,14,750/ -. The said officers seized the goods on the ground that the respondents failed to produce the legal documents for importation of goods. A show cause notice dated 14.11.2005 was issued proposing to confiscate the goods and to impose penalty on the respondent and its partner, Shri Vijay Kumar of the respondent -company. The Adjudicating Authority confiscated the seized goods and imposed redemption fine of Rs. 3,00,000/ - and penalty of Rs. 50,000/ - each on the respondent -firm and its partner. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Adjudication Order. Hence the Revenue filed this appeal.
(3.) LD . Advocate on behalf of the respondents reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the goods are non -notified items under Section 123 of the Customs, Act, 1962. The burden of proof lies with the department to establish that the goods are of smuggled nature. He further submits that the respondent admitted in their statement that the goods were purchased from the open market and there is no evidence that the goods were smuggled by the respondent. Hence, the confiscation and imposition of penalty are unjustified. He further submits that these goods are freely available in the open market. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shantilal Mehta v. Union of India, 1983 (14) ELT 1715 (SC). He also relied upon the decisions of the Tribunal as under -