- (1.) We have heard Mr. A.P. Mathur, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. Dipak Seth, learned counsel for the respondents. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties as well as perusal of the record, we proposed to decide the appeals finally at the stage of admission itself with the following order.
(2.) The appellants have framed the following substantial question of law: "(i) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in deciding the appeals in a casual manner without perusing the records before it? (ii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal can decide the Appeals without giving findings on each contentions raised and argued during the course of hearing? (iii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in ignoring the vital fact that the order of the Commissioner was under challenge before them and they were duty bound to deal with all the findings of the Commissioner in the light of the records of the case? (iv) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in imposing penalties of the Appellant when the records in question did not belong to the appellant, who are only a transporter and they are only concerned with freight as there is nothing on record to show that they received extra money for transporting contraband goods. (v) Whether the Tribunal was justified in imposing penalties where the seizure was not in accordance with the procedure as the possession of the goods and the truck was not taken by the Customs Officers from the Trade Tax Department after 10 days of detention of the goods in question from the godowns of the Trade Tax Department where the goods were kept after verifying the contents of the packages by opening the same by the Trade Tax Officers - The reliefs as prayed by the appellants are as follows: "That the appellants, therefore, prays that this Hon'ble Court may expeditiously be pleased to allow the present Appeal on the basis of substantial questions of law and grounds formulated in the Memo of Appeal."
(3.) The appellants are engaged in the business of the Transport and Logistics services all over India by hiring trucks of other owners when required for transporting their customers goods. They had hired one truck bearing Truck No. HR38M/9077 for transportation of goods. On 21 -6 -2007, at Naubatpur Trade Tax Check Post, the said truck was checked by the Sales Tax Authorities. The owner of the truck is named as Kuldeep Singh. The truck was loaded with foreign origin gas cylinders without papers in the garb of machinery and auto parts and therefore, the Trade Tax Officials seized the goods and held the truck in the premise of Trade Tax Office on the same day within an hour. However, it parked in the Trade Tax Office being in the possession of the Customs Officers till 30 -6 -2007. The Indian goods loaded in the truck were released by the officers of Trade Tax Department. The alleged contraband goods and the truck was taken by the Customs Officers to Varanasi Customs Office where the witnesses were called, pursuant to which a show cause notice dated 26 -12 -2007 was issued to the appellants. The appellants submitted a reply to the show cause notice denying their knowledge of the contraband nature of the goods. They also submitted that since they were not aware of the nature of consignment, they did not open the consignment in question for verification of nature of the goods. It was opened only when the nature of goods was taken up by the Customs Officers. After receiving the reply of the show cause notice, the Commissioner of Customs adjudicated upon the goods vide order dated 11 -11 -2008 and imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 2,50,000/ - on the appellant, who hired the truck and Rs. 10,000/ - on the driver. Learned Commissioner also confiscated the truck and proposed to release the same on payment of Rs. 1,00,000/ -.;