1987 (5) TMI 4 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of gold and silver under Customs Act.
2. Imposition of penalties on the petitioner.
3. Appeal against the orders of the Collector of Customs.
4. Rejection of applications by the Tribunal.
5. Petitions filed under section 130(3) of the Act and section 82B(3) of the Gold (Control) Act.
6. Referral of questions for the opinion of the court.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a case where the police intercepted an individual near a petitioner's house and found silver in his possession. Subsequently, gold, silver, and wristwatches were seized from the petitioner's house. The Collector of Customs confiscated the goods and imposed penalties on the petitioner under relevant sections of the Customs Act and the Gold (Control) Act. The petitioner appealed to the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, arguing that he was not involved in the possession of the contraband goods. The Tribunal upheld the ownership of the goods by the petitioner but reduced the penalty imposed under the Customs Act. The petitioner then sought reference of questions under section 130(1) of the Act and section 82B of the Gold (Control) Act, which were rejected by the Tribunal in 1986.

The petitioner subsequently filed petitions under section 130(3) of the Act and section 82B(3) of the Gold (Control) Act, seeking directions to the Appellate Tribunal to refer questions for the court's opinion. The court observed that certain questions raised by the petitioner were not presented before the Tribunal during the appeals, and therefore, they did not arise from the Tribunal's order. The court emphasized that the Tribunal's finding regarding the petitioner's involvement in the contraband goods was based on factual evidence and did not give rise to any legal questions. Consequently, the court dismissed both petitions in limine, upholding the Tribunal's decision.

In conclusion, the court's judgment affirmed the Tribunal's decision regarding the petitioner's ownership and involvement in the confiscated goods. The court rejected the petitioner's requests to refer questions for the court's opinion, stating that the questions did not arise from the Tribunal's order. The dismissal of the petitions under section 130(3) of the Act and section 82B(3) of the Gold (Control) Act marked the final decision in the case.