1985 (7) TMI 202 - AT - Central Excise

Accountal of - Accountal of gold ornaments held by licensed dealer, in such capacity, at premises even other than his licensed premises, in subsidiary GS 12 register, obligatory

Summary

Issues:
Violation of Section 55 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 - Contravention of provisions regarding accounting of gold ornaments - Confiscation and penalty imposed by Collector upheld by Gold Control Administrator - Appeal against the order.

Analysis:

1. The case involved the violation of Section 55 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, regarding the maintenance of accurate accounts of gold ornaments by a licensed dealer. The appellant, P.V. Raikar, was found in possession of unaccounted old and new gold ornaments during a search conducted by Preventive Officers of Central Excise, Calicut.

2. The Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Cochin, held that the seized ornaments belonged to P.V. Raikar himself, as no entries were made for these ornaments in the relevant subsidiary register. The Collector ordered confiscation of the unaccounted ornaments under Section 71 of the Act and imposed a fine of Rs. 50,000/- along with a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on P.V. Raikar.

3. The Gold Control Administrator upheld the Collector's decision, rejecting the claim that the old ornaments belonged to five other individuals. The Administrator also dismissed the story regarding the new ornaments and reduced the fine to Rs. 20,000/- and the penalty to Rs. 5,000/-.

4. During the appeal, P.V. Raikar's representative argued that the provisions of Section 55 were not contravened, claiming that the old ornaments were given by others for manufacturing new ornaments. However, the SDR contended that discrepancies in statements and lack of proper documentation indicated a violation of the Act.

5. The Tribunal found inconsistencies in P.V. Raikar's statements and the claims made by the five individuals regarding ownership of the seized old ornaments. The Tribunal also noted the absence of entries in the subsidiary register for the new ornaments, supporting the Collector's decision of confiscation.

6. The Tribunal clarified that Section 55 applies to the accounting of gold ornaments by a licensed dealer regardless of the location, emphasizing the need for accurate record-keeping. Therefore, the non-accountal of the ornaments by P.V. Raikar constituted a violation of the Act, justifying the confiscation and penalty imposed.

7. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed all six appeals, affirming the decision to uphold the confiscation and penalty imposed on P.V. Raikar for the violation of Section 55 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968.