Judgment
1. This appeal by Shri Sanjay Kr. Jain is directed against Order No.241/89, dated 25-10-1989 passed by Additional Collector of Customs (Prev.), New Delhi insofar as it related to the confiscation of the truck belonging to the appellants giving him the option to redeem it on payment of fine in lieu of confiscation of Rs. 75,000/-. In the appeal it has been pleaded that confiscation and imposition of fine be set aside.2. Shri L.C. Sikka, learned Advocate appeared for the appellant and argued his case. He stated that though the appellant is the owner of the truck he is not handling the work of the transport company which was using the car. His brother was looking after that work. It was pleaded by Shri Sikka that the appellant was not responsible for the use of the truck in carrying the goods which were seized by the customs authorities therefrom. He relied upon the Bombay High Court judgment reported in 1984 (15) E.L.T. 375 wherein it was held that confiscation of the ship carrying smuggled goods was not valid when no rules had been framed by the Government for the precautions to be taken under Section 115(2) of Customs Act, 1962. He pleaded that the appeal be allowed and the confiscation and fine set aside.
3. Shri K.N. Gupta, learned Senior Departmental Representative stated in reply that the truck had been used in the carriage of smuggled goods with the knowledge of the driver who was in charge of the vehicle. The plea taken that the appellant the owner had no knowledge of the use of the truck for carrying smuggled goods does not have any force, he contended and pleaded that the appeal may be dismissed.
4. We have considered the submissions. The confiscation of the truck is legally in order in terms of Section 115(2) of Customs Act. The judgment relied upon by Shri Sikka does not help the appellant as the provision in the said rule regarding rules to be prescribed by the Government for being observed by the owner or the person incharge of the vehicle had been deleted vide Section 79 of Finance Act, 1988. The seizure of the goods was effected in October, 1988 after the said change in the sub-section. We, therefore, uphold the order of confiscation. However, in the circumstances of the case, we are inclined to reduce the fine in lieu of confiscation to Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) which would meet the ends of justice. The appeal is partially allowed to the extent of reducing the fine in lieu of confiscation as above to Rs. 50,000/- but is otherwise dismissed.
5. The operative part of the order was announced in the court at the end of the hearing.