Piyush Mahendra Jain Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)
In Piyush Mahendra Jain v. Commissioner of Customs, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi examined whether penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 and confiscation of a vehicle under Section 115(2) were sustainable in the absence of evidence showing knowledge of smuggling.
The appellant challenged the order dated 11.10.2023 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), which upheld the order dated 09.09.2022 of the Additional Commissioner confirming penalty under Section 117. The case arose from interception of a vehicle bearing registration No. MP-09-WG-1927 by officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence on 20.03.2021 at Indore. The vehicle, owned by the appellant, was used by Ajay Kumar and Mohammad Nisar Mew to transport 6.9 kg of gold bars allegedly linked to smuggling. Statements of the concerned persons were recorded on 21.03.2021.
A show cause notice dated 17.09.2021 alleged that the appellant supported smuggling by providing his vehicle, that he was a partner in M/s. Pulak Ornaments LLP, and that he was aware the vehicle contained a secret cavity used for transporting smuggled gold. It was further alleged that the vehicle was liable for confiscation under Section 115(2) and that the appellant was liable for penalty under Section 117. The appellant denied the allegations in his reply.
