9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Confiscation of silver under Section 113 of the Act - Imposition of penalty under Section 114 of the Act - Retraction of statements by the appellant - Intention of smuggling silver out of India - Redemption fine for release of confiscated silver Confiscation of Silver under Section 113 of the Act: The appeal challenged the confiscation of 24.850 kg of silver seized from the appellant's possession in Surat under Section 113 of the Act. The appellant, a silver-smith from Maharashtra, explained that he was en route to Nandurbar with silver bars obtained from melting ornaments in Indore. However, the Central Excise officers seized the silver in Surat, alleging a deliberate act. The department argued that the silver was brought to Surat intentionally and was liable for confiscation. The Collector's findings supported the confiscation due to the absence of evidence proving the appellant's claim of passing through Surat. The silver was seized within the specified area under the Act, and no transport voucher covered it, justifying the confiscation. Imposition of Penalty under Section 114 of the Act: The appellant's advocate contended that the statements signed by the appellant were not retracted, although the Additional Collector claimed they were retracted without specifying the date. The lack of denial regarding the silver seizure in Surat and non-compliance with transport voucher requirements led to upholding the confiscation. Despite uncertainties about the appellant's intention to smuggle the silver, the penalty was imposed. The Collector did not explicitly state an intention to smuggle based on the statements, which were in Gujarati and lacked translation or context explanation. The penalty was deemed justifiable, but absolute confiscation was considered excessive. Retraction of Statements by the Appellant: The issue of retraction of statements by the appellant arose, with conflicting claims between the appellant's advocate and the Additional Collector. The absence of a clear retraction date and the lack of denial regarding the silver seizure weakened the appellant's case. The appellant's version of events was unsupported by evidence, raising doubts about the credibility of the statements and their impact on the case. Intention of Smuggling Silver out of India: The judgment highlighted the ambiguity surrounding the appellant's intention to smuggle the silver out of India. While there was no concrete evidence supporting the appellant's claim of heading to Nandurbar, the Collector did not explicitly state an intention to smuggle based on the available information. The purpose of the Act's relevant chapter was to prevent smuggling, and the lack of substantial evidence regarding the appellant's intentions complicated the decision-making process. Redemption Fine for Release of Confiscated Silver: In the final decision, the judge allowed the appeal partially by setting aside the absolute confiscation of silver. Instead, the silver could be redeemed upon payment of a fine of Rs. 30,000, considering the silver's value at Rs. 1.10 lakhs. The redemption fine took into account the penalty imposed on the appellant, aiming to balance the financial consequences. If the silver had been disposed of, the fine and sale expenses were to be deducted from the proceeds, with any remaining balance refunded to the appellant.
|
