2017 (10) TMI 222 - AT - Customs

Absolute Confiscation - Indian and Foreign Currencies - Baggage Rules - Held that - on a specific query from the Bench, appellant s counsel is not able to justify possession of such huge amount of Indian and foreign currencies and that also taking it abroad; he could not answer the query as to why such a huge amount of cash was being carried by the appellant to a place outside India. The provisions of Section 125 read holistically is very clear; in the case of goods which are not prohibited the adjudicating authority shall give the owner of the goods or the person from whom the said goods were seized, an option to pay a fine in lieu of confiscation, while the said section does not provide or mandate the adjudicating authority in respect of the prohibited goods - appellant is not able to justify the possession of such huge amount of Indian and foreign currencies, the impugned order of the adjudicating authority absolutely confiscating the Indian and foreign currencies is correct and legal. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Confiscation of Indian and foreign currencies under the Customs Act 1962.
- Redemption of confiscated goods under Section 125 of the Customs Act.
- Justification for possession and transportation of large amounts of cash outside India.

Confiscation of Indian and Foreign Currencies:
The appeal was against the order-in-original where Indian and foreign currencies were seized from the appellant, who confessed to carrying them outside India. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation but remanded the matter for considering redemption. The adjudicating authority in the de novo adjudication concluded that the currencies should be absolutely confiscated. The appellant argued for redemption under Section 125 of the Customs Act, citing precedents allowing redemption of foreign currency. However, the Tribunal found the appellant's defense weak, as carrying such large amounts of cash for business purposes abroad was not justifiable. Referring to a previous decision, the Tribunal held that in cases where Indian currency exceeds the allowed limit, confiscation is discretionary, and in this case, the confiscation was deemed legal and correct.

Redemption of Confiscated Goods under Section 125:
The appellant's counsel argued for redemption of the confiscated currencies under Section 125 of the Customs Act, contending that the seized currency was not goods for export purposes. He referenced a case allowing redemption of foreign currency and another case stating that Indian currency is not prohibited goods. However, the Tribunal found the appellant unable to justify the possession and transportation of such a significant amount of cash outside India, leading to the rejection of the appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that Section 125 provides for redemption only for goods that are not prohibited, and in this case, the confiscation was deemed appropriate.

Justification for Possession and Transportation of Cash:
The Tribunal questioned the appellant's justification for carrying a substantial amount of Indian and foreign currencies outside India for business purposes. The appellant's defense that it was part of business proceedings was deemed weak, as it was unusual for business transactions to involve carrying large sums of cash outside the country. The Tribunal found the appellant's explanations unsatisfactory and upheld the adjudicating authority's decision to absolutely confiscate the currencies. The Tribunal emphasized that the discretion to allow redemption of Indian currency exceeding limits lies with the proper officer, and in this case, no interference was warranted as the confiscation was found to be legal and correct.