1997 (6) TMI 187 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Confiscation of gold bars.
2. Imposition of penalty on the appellant.
3. Validity of initial statement given by the appellant.
4. Claim by Balan regarding the gold biscuits.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Confiscation of Gold Bars:
The appeal was filed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise & Customs, Kochi, which confiscated 30 gold bars bearing foreign markings. The gold was seized on the reasonable belief that it was liable to confiscation under the Customs Act. The appellant initially claimed the gold was purchased from P. Thomas, but later retracted this statement, claiming the gold belonged to Balan, who provided a baggage receipt for 42 gold biscuits. The Tribunal held that the initial statement of the appellant, which admitted possession of the gold without duty-paying documents, was binding and had evidentiary value. The Tribunal found the claim by Balan to be an afterthought and upheld the confiscation of the gold biscuits.

2. Imposition of Penalty on the Appellant:
The Collector had imposed a penalty on the appellant. The appellant argued that the initial statement was taken under duress and coercion, and thus should not be relied upon. However, the Tribunal noted that the appellant did not allege any physical harm and that the statement was voluntary and true. The Tribunal reduced the penalty imposed on the appellant to Rs. 4.00 lacs but upheld the confiscation of the gold.

3. Validity of Initial Statement Given by the Appellant:
The appellant contended that his initial statement was taken under duress and coercion. However, the Tribunal noted that the appellant admitted to no physical harm and that there were no visible marks of violence. The Tribunal cited the Supreme Court's decision that retracted confessional statements could be relied upon if they were voluntary and true. The Tribunal found the initial statement to be voluntary and true, thus binding on the appellant.

4. Claim by Balan Regarding the Gold Biscuits:
Balan claimed that he had imported the gold biscuits and provided a baggage receipt. However, the Tribunal found this claim to be an afterthought, as it was made only on 28-10-1994, after the initial statement by the appellant. The Tribunal noted that the baggage receipt did not mention the description of the gold biscuits, making it impossible to relate the seized gold to the imported gold. The Tribunal rejected Balan's claim and dismissed his appeal.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of the gold biscuits and reduced the penalty on the appellant to Rs. 4.00 lacs. The claim by Balan was rejected as an afterthought, and his appeal was dismissed. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of proper documentation and directed that the matter be brought to the notice of the Central Board of Excise and Customs to ensure proper issuance of baggage receipts.