2002 (1) TMI 578 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Seizure of gold pieces from individuals during interception.
2. Conflicting statements and denials by the accused.
3. Imposition of penalties under the Customs Act, 1962.
4. Appeals against penalty reduction and dismissal.

Issue 1: Seizure of Gold Pieces
The Customs Officers intercepted two individuals from a Roadways bus and found 7 gold pieces each of foreign origin weighing 1633 grams in their rectums. The gold, valued at Rs. 7,28,000/-, was of 24 carat purity. The individuals admitted to smuggling the gold, with one stating he brought it from Nepal and handed it over to another person for dollars. The proceedings were initiated based on these findings.

Issue 2: Conflicting Statements and Denials
The accused individuals denied the charges, claiming their statements were obtained under duress and coercion. They asserted no connection with the seized gold, and one of them even denied being involved in the smuggling operation. The defense argued lack of evidence linking one accused to the contraband gold. However, these contentions were not accepted as the accused had initially confirmed the gold recovery voluntarily before retracting their statements later.

Issue 3: Imposition of Penalties
The Deputy Commissioner of Customs ordered the absolute confiscation of the seized gold under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. Additionally, penalties of Rs. 40,000/- each on two individuals and Rs. 50,000/- on another were imposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. The penalties were later reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals), with one penalty being set aside.

Issue 4: Appeals Against Penalties
The accused individuals filed appeals against the Commissioner's order, contesting the penalties imposed. During the appeal hearing, the appellants reiterated their innocence, claiming the case was fabricated. However, the Tribunal found no merit in their arguments, stating that the recovery of gold from the accused was well-documented, and their voluntary statements confirmed the same. The Tribunal upheld the penalties, dismissing the appeals for lack of merit.

This detailed analysis of the judgment covers the issues surrounding the seizure of gold, conflicting statements and denials by the accused, the imposition of penalties under the Customs Act, 1962, and the subsequent appeals against the penalties.