9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (3) TMI 349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ' for short. 3. Appellant Ratan Jewellers are licensed Gold Dealers at Nellore. Appellant Hirachand is the Power of Attorney of Ratan Jewellers looking after the business of the firm. Appellant Kiran Kumar is the son of appellant Hirachand. 4. On 16-2-1986 the Superintendent of Central Excise (Preventive), Nellore, along with his officers intercepted appellant Kiran Kumar at Nellore bus stand and recovered from his possession 14 paper packets containing 340 pieces of new gold ornaments of different description totally weighing 1097.000 gms. Kiran Kumar was also found in possession of 2 vouchers bearing Nos. 99 and 100 issued in the name of Jashko Fashion Jewellers, Kottayam. Since the ornaments were in trade quantities and the vouchers found in the possession of Kiran Kumar contained many irregularities and also some over-writing, the authorities on a reasonable belief that the ornaments in question were being taken for purposes of sale in contravention of the provisions of the Act effected seizure of the same under a mahazar as per law. As a follow up action, the authorities verified the stocks and accounts at M/s. Ratan Jewellers, Nellore, and found the same to be correct. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her No. 99 dated 16-2-1986. It was contended that Kiran Kumar was also carrying a credit bill for the total quantity of gold ornaments for a total sum of Rs. 2,,11,999/- and the bill is also dated 16-2-1986. The learned Consultant submitted that it is open to Ratan Jewellers to effect sales in their premises to another Dealer on the basis of purchase order and in the present case in para 6 of the show cause notice dated 28-7-1986 it is admitted by the Department that on verification of the records at Jashko Fashion Jewellers, Kottayam, on 11-3-1986 Jose, proprietor of Jashko Fashion Jewellers, stated that an order dated 10-2-1986 was placed with appellant M/s. Ratan Jewellers, Nellore, for one kg. of new gold ornaments and in support of his version produced a photostat copy of his letter dated 10-2-1986. The learned Consultant submitted that this purchase order, which was verified by the authorities, must be accepted and acted upon in which case the charge under Section 27(7) (b) is not sustainable on the facts. The learned Consultant further submitted that absolute confiscation of 12.350 gms. of primary gold is also not correct, since the purity of the primary gold was only 18 ct. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ornaments which are not acceptable to me will be returned to you with the voucher." It is indeed strange that a licensed Gold Dealer at Kottayam would not even specify the nature of ornaments, the design, the purity and other relevant particulars in the order he has placed with the appellant Ratan Jewellers. Likewise, in the voucher issued in support of the alleged sale of 1097.000 gms. of ornaments covered by voucher Nos. 99 & 100, we do not find any description at all about the nature of the ornaments, the net weight, description, etc. Voucher No. 100 merely states gold ornaments 339 pieces and weight 1083. Likewise, voucher No. 99 merely states gold ornaments, weight 14. Therefore, in our view the purchase order has absolutely nothing to do with the ornaments under seizure. We would also like to note that the credit bill dated 16-2-1986 purported to have been issued by appellant Ratan Jewellers for the sale of 1083.000 gms. or ornaments in question does not contain the order No. of Jashko Fashion Jewellers. The admitted fact remains that the purchase order of Jashko Fashion Jewellers was not produced by the appellant at the time when the authorities visited the business premis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... overed from the residential premises of appellant Hirachand, who is the Power of Attorney of Ratan Jewellers, the appeal is not contested on merits and the charges of contravention are conceded. Therefore, on consideration of the entire evidence on record we hold that the charges of contravention against Ratan Jewellers except the one under Section 27(1) of the Act have been proved and established. We find that the ornaments totally weighing 1097.000 gms. are of 22 ct. purity as evidenced by the annexure to the mahazar dated 16-2-1986 and the value of the same has been put at Rs. 2,08,430/- by the learned Collector under the impugned order. Keeping the purity and the value of the ornaments in mind and also the nature of the contraventions alleged against the appellant Ratan Jewellers, we modify the quantum of fine and reduce the same from Rs. 1,50,000/- to Rs. 75,000/- (Rs. Seventyfive thousand). 11. The primary gold and gold ornaments totally weighing 35.650 gms. recovered from the residential premises of appellant Hirachand and which we have held to belong to Ratan Jewellers forming part of the stock in trade, are valued at Rs. 6,527/-in the impugned order. Keeping in mind that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
