ORDER
Archana Wadhwa, Member, J.
1. Vide the impugned order, the authorities below have confiscated 48 numbers of Cattle on the finding that the same were attempted to be exported to Bangladesh.
2. As per the facts on records, three trucks were intercepted by the Customs Officers on 2-2-1996 at 5 a.m. in the morning. The said trucks were found to be loaded with catties. Immediately after the seizure, the statement of the driver and the khalasi, were recorded who deposed that the catties were loaded in the truck from Cattle Market and the persons who loaded the goods were Bangladeshi citizen. Another Bangladeshi citizen was in the truck to give the location and particulars of the persons to whom the cattle was to be delivered. As per his statement, cattle were to go to Narukhaki Ghat which is located at Padma River which is dividing line between India and Bangladesh. The Customs Officers on a reasonable belief that the goods were going to be exported to Bangladesh, seized the same along with the vehicles.
3. Subsequently, the owner of the vehicles in question claimed the provisional release of the truck which was given to them on deposit of the amount and on execution of bond. Subsequently, on 26-4-1996, the appellant, Shri Azizur Rahaman, claimed the ownership of 12 catties and the other appellant, Shri Jamshed AH, filed a Claim Petition for 36 catties. Shri Azizur Rahaman produced one money receipt given by the Customs Officers for showing the sale of cattle during auction and Shri Jamshed Ali could not produce any purchase voucher for the catties claimed by him. They also submitted that the place of interception was shown wrongly by the Customs authorities and the truck in fact was intercepted at Nagpur, 60 km. away from the Bangladesh border.
4. The adjudicating authority, after considering the submissions made by the appellants, confiscated the catties but ordered release of the truck. Appeal against the same did not succeed before the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeals.
5. After going through the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), I find that he has discussed in details each and every plea taken by the appellants. As regards the first point of interception of the vehicle, he has recorded that the contention of the appellants cannot be accepted inasmuch as the drivers of the vehicle in his very first statement before the customs authorities have admitted the interception of the truck near Padma River. The statement of the Khalasi is also to that effect. The said statement have not been retracted by the said two persons. The subsequent filing of statement signed by 14 eye witnesses at the time of filing reply to the show cause notice by the appellants will not tilt of weight of the evidence in favour of the appellants.
6. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also recorded that the driver and khalasi in their statements, have very clearly deposed that the catties in question were to be delivered to Bangladesh citizen near Padma River which is dividing line between India and Bangladesh. I also find that one of the appellant, Shri Jamshed Ali is also the owner of the trucks which were intercepted by the officers. At the time of filing the claim petition for the provisional release of the trucks, the said appellant did not disclose that he was also the owner of the catties in question. On the contrary, he stated that he had no knowledge that the driver had loaded the catties on hire from a catties hat. As rightly observed by the authorities below if Shri Jamshed Ali was having a legitimate documents with him to show the possession of the catties and if he was not having a guilty mind about the export of cattle to Bangladesh, nothing prevented him to disclose the factum of ownership of the catties in question at the time of making the prayer for provisional release of the trucks. On the contrary, he took two-and-a-half months to lodge his claim for the catties in question. All these facts and circumstances are reflecting upon the factum of catties being exported to Bangladesh. Accordingly, I uphold the impugned order and reject both the appeals.