RANJIT SINGH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (P), PATNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is against the confiscation of truck under the provisions of Section 115 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant is the owner of the truck and has been given an option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 1 lakh (Rupees one lakh only).

(2.) IT is seen from the impugned order passed by the Commissioner, Patna that he has recorded that the appellant was not involved in the act of smuggling. His truck has been confiscated because the same was used for transportation of gas cylinder which has been found by the Customs Officer as smuggled. It is also seen that the drivers statement was not recorded and there is nothing on record to show that the driver was in knowledge of the fact that gas cylinder loaded in his truck were of smuggled character. Shri T.K. Kar, ld. SDR however submits that the driver in spite of summons never appeared for recording of his statement and this fact reflected upon his guilty mind.

(3.) I find that the provisions of Section 115 (2) of the Customs Act, provide for confiscation of vehicle used as a means of transport in the smuggled goods unless the owner of the conveyance proves that it was so used without the knowledge or connivance of the owner himself, his agent, if any, and the person in charge of the conveyance. In the present case, owner has been held to be un -knowledgeable about the use of truck for the said purposes, by the Commissioner himself. The drivers statement was also not there to show that the truck was so used with his knowledge. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the confiscation of the truck is not warranted. Accordingly, I allow the appeal filed by the appellant with consequential relief.