Page 238 - ELT_15th August 2020_Vol 373_Part 4

572 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

2. The Revision application has been filed on the ground that the order
of the Commissioner (Appeals) is erroneous. The Appellate Authority failed to
appreciate the quantum of the redemption fine imposed by the Adjudicating Au-
thority on the huge amount of the seized foreign currency, which are prohibited
goods. The appellate authority has reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 5 lacs arbi-
trarily without giving any cogent reason to substantiate the relief. The Order-in-
Appeal has also set aside the penalty imposed on Sh. Virender Verma. The revi-
sion application in Para No. 11.8 states as follows “the very fact of non-compliance
of the conditions of export renders such goods liable for confiscation and for absolute con-
fiscation in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. Personal hearing in the matter was fixed on 18-9-2019 which was not
attended by the applicant. Ms. Nidhi Tomar, Proxy Counsel appeared for the
respondent and requested for copy of the Revision Application. Accordingly, the
next date of hearing was fixed on 10-10-2019. Sh. Ritaj Kacker, Advocate attend-
ed the hearing on behalf of the respondent. He was asked to produce a copy of
show cause notice issued to applicant along with the relied upon documents. No
one appeared from the applicant’s side also, and no communication for ad-
journment has been received from them. Hence the case is being decided on the
basis of evidence on record.
4. The case file C. No. VIII (AP) 10/P&I/835-C/Dep/2014 was sought
from the applicant on 6-11-2019. From the perusal of the file it has been observed
that a Complaint for offences punishable under Sections 132 & 135(1)(a) &
135(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 has been filed by the applicant against the re-
spondents Shri Tushar Kumar and Virender Verma on 25-3-2017. Shri Tushar
Kumar in his statement dated 3-7-2014 recorded under Section 108 has stated the
currency did not belong to him and the same was handed over to him by the
mother of one person, namely, Sh. Virender Verma of Delhi, alleged to be the
owner of currency. The currency was concealed inside the inner linings of his
check in baggage so as to avoid detection by the Customs. He did not have any
documents or evidence for lawful possession of the impugned currency. He fur-
ther stated that Virender Verma was introduced to him by his cousin. Shri Ayush
Malik and had promised him Rs. 20,000/- for carrying the currency. Shri Tushar
Kumar was arrested on 3-7-2004 and was released on Bail Bond with surety ten-
dered by Smt Naina Malik, W/o Shri Ayush Malik. Shri Virender Verma stated
that Shri Ayush Malik was his friend and Shri Tushar Kumar is cousin of Shri
Ayush Malik.
5. Shri Virender Verma in his statement under Section 108 of Customs
Act, 1962, dated 16-12-2014 has stated that he was engaged in the business of
trading of electronic and clothing goods in Hong Kong and was getting commis-
sions for the same in US $. He also submitted commission invoices raised in his
favour by M/s. Fast International Trading, Hong Kong, from 2-4-2014 to 1-7-2014
and the seized currency were his savings from his business. He also submitted
the copies of bank accounts in JP Morgan Chase which the evidencing with-
drawal of US$ 14008 and US$ 11500. He had asked his friend Shri Ayush Malik
to get the impugned currency delivered to him in Hong Kong, through his
cousin Shri Tushar Kumar.
6. Section 2(22) of Customs Act, 1962 defines Goods as :
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th August 2020  238