LAWS(CE)-2001-5-335

KRISHAN KUMAR SHARMA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, LUCKNOW

Decided On May 28, 2001
KRISHAN KUMAR SHARMA Appellant
V/S
Commissioner Of Customs, Lucknow Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT filed this appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs whereby his Truck No. HR -29/C -6077 was confiscated under Section 115 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the option was given to the appellant to redeem the truck on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 1 lakh. The personal penalty of Rs. 1 lakh was also imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the appellant.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on 25.6.98, the officers of Customs apprehended a truck No. HR -29/C -6077 which was parked near Katra forest barrier, Railway Crossing. On search of the truck various cartons (SIC) third country (SIC) were found of the value of Rs. 14,67,800/ -. Shri Harender Kumar Singh, Cleaner of the truck was present on the spot could not produce any legal document in respect of the import of the goods. The goods were taken into possession. Shri Harender Kumar Singh, in his statement under Section 108 of Customs act, 1962 submits that the third country origin goods were loaded in the truck in the presence of the owner of the truck (present appellant) and Shri Shashi. he also submits that the goods in question were brought from Nepal without any import documents, and were kept concealed at Siliguri in the Godown of Western Carrier, S.F. Road, Siliguri and the appellant Shri Shashi instructed the driver of the truck, unload the goods at Laxmi Transport at Ghaziabad.A show cause notice was issued to the appellant for confiscation of the truck imposing penalty. Thereafter, the adjudicating authority passed the impugned order.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submit that appellant has no concern with the goods in question, the truck was attached to M/s. Laxmi Transport Company and the driver and Cleaner were appointed by M/s. Laxmi Transport Company. As the truck was under the control of M/s. Laxmi Transport Company, the appellant cannot be penalised fro any act or omission on the part of M/s. Laxmi Transport Company.