ORDER
Mrs. Archna Wadhwa
1. I have heard Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, learned S.D.R. for the Revenue and Shri Aftab Ahmed, learned Advocate for the respondent.
2. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide his impugned Order has set aside the Order of the lower authorities vide which he had confiscated the ball bearings of foreign origin and imposed penalty. The commissioner (Appeals) has observed that inasmuch as the ball bearings are non-notified items and there is no evidence on record showing the illegal entry of the same into India, confiscation was not justified. For appreciation, the operative portion of the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is reproduced below:-
“I, therefore, find that absolute confiscation is not justified in the facts and circumstances of the case, as the department has not brought on record any positive evidence to establish or prove the smuggled nature or contraband character of the impugned goods. Accordingly, I set aside the impugned order with consequential relief to both the appellants as neither the impugned goods are liable for confiscation nor is there any merit in the imposition of personal penalty.”
As against the above, no evidence has been referred to by the Revenue in the Appeals. As such, I do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) and reject the appeals of the Revenue.
Dictated in the open court.