STATE Vs. COMMR. OF CUS. (PREV.), WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides. The appellants filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby a penalty of Rs. 2.00 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs only) was imposed on the appellants. The appellant is a transporter. The case of the Revenue is that total 26 consignments of smuggled fabric were seized from the appellants godown. Therefore, the appellants are dealing with the smuggled goods, hence, liable for penalty.

(2.) THE contention of the appellants is that the Tribunal in the case of M/s. New Heera Sales Corporation vide Final Order No. A -624/Kol/2009, dated 14 -10 -2009 set aside the confiscation in respect of 23 consignments valued at Rs. 32,04,194/ - which were claimed by M/s. New Heera Sales Corporation. The contention is that only 3 (three) consignments remained unclaimed and the total value of the consignment is Rs. 25,000/ - (Rupees twenty -five thousand only). In respect of remaining three unclaimed consignments, the appellants disclosed the names of the consignors and consignees. Hence, the appellants are not liable for any penalty.

(3.) THE Revenue relied upon the decision of the Honble Calcutta High Court in the case of Commr. of Customs (Prev.), West Bengal v. Suresh Kumar Nyollywala reported in 2006 (204) E.L.T. 525 (Cal.) and submitted that in case nobody is taking responsibility of the goods, itself suggests that those are smuggled goods and the Honble High Court held that the transporter is duty bound to verify contents of consignment and also genuineness of names and addresses of consignors. The Honble High Court further held that the penalty on the transporter is imposable under Section 112 of the Customs Act.