9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Confiscation of gold and Indian currency by Customs officer. 2. Contesting confiscation of gold and currency. 3. Onus of proving smuggled nature of gold and currency. 4. Evidence of sale of smuggled goods. 5. Appellant's retraction of initial statement. 6. Legal possession of gold and documentary evidence. 7. Interpretation of Section 121 of Customs Act. Analysis: The appellant filed an appeal against the order-in-appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the confiscation of gold and Indian currency by the Customs officer during a search at the appellant's shop. The Customs officer recovered foreign origin gold pieces along with Indian currency. The adjudicating authority confiscated the gold and currency, alleging the gold to be smuggled and the currency as proceeds from the sale of smuggled gold. The appellant contested the confiscation of two gold pieces without foreign markings and the Indian currency. The appellant argued that the gold was not of foreign origin and claimed to be in the jewelry business. The appellant challenged the confiscation based on lack of foreign markings and retracted an initial statement linking the currency to smuggled gold. The appellant relied on a Tribunal decision regarding the confiscation of currency in similar cases. The Revenue contended that foreign origin gold bars were also found, and the appellant admitted the origin of the melted gold pieces. The Revenue argued that the appellant's admission regarding the currency being from the sale of smuggled gold negated the appellant's subsequent retraction. The Tribunal analyzed the evidence and arguments presented. It noted the lack of evidence supporting the lawful possession of the gold by the appellant, especially considering the nature of the appellant's business. The Tribunal found no merit in the appellant's contentions regarding the seized gold pieces. Regarding the seized currency, the Tribunal considered the appellant's retraction of the initial statement and the legal provisions under Section 121 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal emphasized the need to establish the sale of smuggled goods, knowledge of the seller, and the quantity of goods sold by Customs authorities. As there was no evidence of the sale of smuggled gold, the Tribunal set aside the confiscation of the Indian currency. In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal by ruling in favor of the appellant regarding the confiscation of the Indian currency but upheld the confiscation of the gold pieces without foreign markings due to lack of evidence supporting the appellant's claims.
|
