IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.173 of 2006 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS 5th FLOOR, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, BIRCHAND PATEL PATH, PATNA……………………………………………...APPELLANT Versus SHAMBHU GOYAL S/O ONKARMAL AGRAWAL, HIMALAYA AGRO & CHEMICALS (P) LTD. N.H. 57, RANIGANJ, ROAD, FARBESGANJ, DISTRICT, ARARIA, BIHAR…………………………………………………………………………….RESPONDENT . ----------- 10. 08-07-2010 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the order under appeal whereby appeal preferred by the Respondent, Shambhu Goyal was allowed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 25.10.2005 passed in C/Appeal No.457/04-NB(SM). From the impugned order, it appears that the Tribunal went through the evidence on record and came to a finding that there is no evidence on records to show that the appellant, Shambhu Goyal (Respondent herein) was involved in the smuggling activity. It was noticed that the driver of the truck had not named him as owner of the goods. Against a telephone number mentioned on a slip recovered from the driver the name of Sri Rajaram was mentioned and the said Rajaram also did not name the appellant. The Tribunal further noticed that Rajaram being a dealer of the fertilizers manufactured in the factory of which the respondent is a partner, the telephone number of the factory mentioned against the name of Rajaram cannot show that such number was for the purpose of engaging in smuggling activities in question. After carefully hearing learned counsel for the appellant, we are in agreement with the views of the Tribunal that there is no evidence on record to show that the appellant was involved in 2 smuggling activities in question and we find no merits in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Interlocutory applications stand disposed of. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Birendra Prasad Verma,J.)