Uttam Kumar Biswas Vs. Commissioner of Customs - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. the present appeal is against the order of the authorities below vide which he has confiscated eight buffaloes for attempting to export the same illegally to bangladesh.2. as per facts on record, the said buffaloes were seized by the customs officers on 18-10-99 as unclaimed from a place which was around three kilometres away from the border. the appellant's contention is that the buffaloes were seized by the b.s.f. officers from a place in front of his house at jalangi when the same were grazing the field. he had also produced a receipt showing purchase of the buffaloes from customs auction.3. the above contentions have not been accepted by the authorities below on the ground that the appellant filed his claim after a period of one month and there is nothing to show that the buffaloes were taken into possession from an area in front of his house. shri ghosh, learned consultant for the appellant submits that he immediately contacted the customs officer for release of the buffaloes and he was advised to file a written claim which was done by him subsequently along with a certificate from a pradhan of that area and with other documentary evidence showing purchase of the buffaloes from the customs auction.shri ghosh, learned consultant further submits that the appellant's house is eight kilometres away from the border area. this fact by itself will not show any attempt on the part of the appellant illegally to export the buffaloes.4. after hearing shri t.k. kar, learned sdr for the revenue, i note that the buffaloes being living stock cannot be left unclaimed by the owner in an area near the border, inasmuch as the buffaloes are likely to stray in the absence of any person to take care of their buffaloes.as such, the claim of the b.s.f. officers that the buffaloes were seized as unclaimed is a little bit doubtful. it is further seen that the officer-in-charge of that area has submitted a report to the assistant commissioner of customs to the effect that it substantiates the appellant's claim. he has reported that nobody had come forward at the place of seizure to depose that the buffaloes were seized from that area. on the other hand, the statement of about eight persons were recorded from the village where the appellant resides to show that the buffaloes were seized when the same were grazing in front of the appellant's house. this report which is a detailed one, though was placed before the authorities, but they have not taken note of the same. all the above factors cast grave doubt on the b.s.f. theory of seizure of the buffaloes near the border, as unclaimed. as such, i set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant.

Judgment:
1. The present appeal is against the order of the authorities below vide which he has confiscated eight buffaloes for attempting to export the same illegally to Bangladesh.

2. As per facts on record, the said buffaloes were seized by the Customs Officers on 18-10-99 as unclaimed from a place which was around three kilometres away from the border. The appellant's contention is that the buffaloes were seized by the B.S.F. Officers from a place in front of his house at Jalangi when the same were grazing the field. He had also produced a receipt showing purchase of the buffaloes from Customs Auction.

3. The above contentions have not been accepted by the authorities below on the ground that the appellant filed his claim after a period of one month and there is nothing to show that the buffaloes were taken into possession from an area in front of his house. Shri Ghosh, learned Consultant for the appellant submits that he immediately contacted the Customs Officer for release of the buffaloes and he was advised to file a written claim which was done by him subsequently along with a certificate from a Pradhan of that area and with other documentary evidence showing purchase of the buffaloes from the Customs Auction.

Shri Ghosh, learned Consultant further submits that the appellant's house is eight kilometres away from the border area. This fact by itself will not show any attempt on the part of the appellant illegally to export the buffaloes.

4. After hearing Shri T.K. Kar, learned SDR for the Revenue, I note that the buffaloes being living stock cannot be left unclaimed by the owner in an area near the border, inasmuch as the buffaloes are likely to stray in the absence of any person to take care of their buffaloes.

As such, the claim of the B.S.F. Officers that the buffaloes were seized as unclaimed is a little bit doubtful. It is further seen that the Officer-in-Charge of that area has submitted a report to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs to the effect that it substantiates the appellant's claim. He has reported that nobody had come forward at the place of seizure to depose that the buffaloes were seized from that area. On the other hand, the statement of about eight persons were recorded from the village where the appellant resides to show that the buffaloes were seized when the same were grazing in front of the appellant's house. This report which is a detailed one, though was placed before the authorities, but they have not taken note of the same. All the above factors cast grave doubt on the B.S.F. theory of seizure of the buffaloes near the border, as unclaimed. As such, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant.