2016 (6) TMI 911 - AT - Customs

Seizure of foreign marked gold biscuits - demand of duty - the aforesaid items were absolutely confiscated; penalties under section 112 & 117 of Customs Act, 1962 were also imposed on the appellants. - Held that - appellant has obtained confirmation through RTI queries that the impugned FMG biscuits have been legally imported and has also obtained details of Air Waybills, Bills of Entry, Payments Challans details, etc; in respect of the said goods. The minor discrepancies in the statements are not material. - the appellants have been able to establish the source of the cash which was seized. - appellants have been able to prove that the gold and cash confiscated were not smuggled goods/sale proceeds of smuggled goods. - the confiscation is unjustified - Decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Confiscation of gold biscuits, gold ornaments, and cash
- Imposition of penalties under Customs Act
- Appeal against the Order of the Commissioner
- Submission of documents by the appellant
- Examination of records and evidence
- Justification of confiscation

Confiscation of Gold Biscuits, Gold Ornaments, and Cash:
The case involved the confiscation of foreign marked gold biscuits, gold ornaments, and a significant amount of cash from the appellant. The Customs authorities proposed the confiscation based on the suspicion of non-payment of customs duty on the goods. The adjudicating authority absolutely confiscated the items and imposed penalties under sections 112 & 117 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Imposition of Penalties under Customs Act:
Penalties were imposed on the appellants under sections 112 & 117 of the Customs Act, 1962. The penalties were part of the Order of the Commissioner, which the appellants appealed against. The appeal sought to challenge the confiscation and penalties imposed on the grounds that the goods and cash were not liable for confiscation under the relevant sections of the Customs Act.

Appeal against the Order of the Commissioner:
The appeal was filed against the Order of the Commissioner that led to the confiscation of the gold biscuits, gold ornaments, and cash. The appellants requested the release of the confiscated items and cash, arguing that they had provided documents supporting their claim that the gold was not smuggled and the cash was from legitimate sources.

Submission of Documents by the Appellant:
During the adjudication process, the appellant submitted documents to prove that the gold items were not smuggled goods. They claimed that the gold was supplied by jewellers for manufacturing and repair works. However, the adjudicating authority did not consider their submissions or the documents provided, leading to the confiscation.

Examination of Records and Evidence:
Upon examination of records and evidence, it was found that the appellant had submitted letters from M/s SVBC GOLD to customers and importers, attested copies of letters from original importers, and other documentary evidence confirming the legal import of the gold items. The appellant also obtained details through RTI queries to support their claim.

Justification of Confiscation:
The Tribunal observed that the confiscation of the goods and cash was unjustified. The appellants were able to establish the legal import of the gold items and the legitimate source of the seized cash. Minor discrepancies in statements were deemed immaterial, and it was concluded that the confiscated items were not smuggled goods or proceeds from smuggling. Therefore, the goods were ordered to be released to the appellant, and the appeal was allowed with consequential reliefs.