1999 (9) TMI 373 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
Confiscation of gold bars and Indian currency, imposition of personal penalty, absence of direct evidence against certain individuals, legality of custody and statements recorded, allowance of cross-examination in quasi-judicial proceedings.

Confiscation of Gold Bars and Indian Currency:
The Commissioner, Customs (Preventive) confiscated 16743.000 gms. of gold bars and Indian currency seized from multiple individuals at Calcutta Airport. The gold bars were collectively valued at Rs. 82,20,813, and the Indian currency seized from different individuals was also confiscated. Additionally, a personal penalty of Rs. 3 lac each was imposed on five applicants, while certain individuals were exonerated due to the absence of direct evidence against them.

Legality of Custody and Statements Recorded:
The Senior Advocate representing the applicants argued that the individuals did not know English, only Tamil, and were traders settled in Manipur. They were taken into custody on 31-5-1994 and produced before the Magistrate beyond 24 hours, which was deemed unconstitutional. The Advocate contended that the statements recorded by Customs Officers were unreliable, and the denial of cross-examination of witnesses and panchanama witnesses was a patent error of law by the adjudicating authority. The Senior Advocate emphasized that cross-examination was crucial for proving the applicants' case, and the adjudicating authority failed to provide reasons for disallowing it.

Allowance of Cross-Examination in Quasi-Judicial Proceedings:
The Advocate for one of the applicants submitted that gold seized from the applicant had been declared to the Income-Tax Authorities as ornaments. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments from both sides, agreed that cross-examination of various persons requested by the appellants was necessary for adequately proving their case. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed by remand. The adjudicating authority was directed to conduct a de-novo decision after allowing the requested cross-examination, as it was deemed essential for the applicants to present their case effectively.

This detailed analysis of the legal judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, CALCUTTA highlights the issues surrounding the confiscation of gold bars and Indian currency, the legality of custody and statements recorded, and the allowance of cross-examination in quasi-judicial proceedings. The Tribunal's decision to set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals by remand underscores the importance of procedural fairness and the right to cross-examination in legal proceedings.