9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (8) TMI 156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id goods were seized, is entitled for the - (a) Value of such goods determined at the time of seizure as shown in the panchnama; or (b) the sale proceeds of the said goods disposed of in terms of Section 110(1A)of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are as under :- (1) On 8-5-1991, under the authority of a search warrant issued by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Indore, residential and business premises of M/s. Ajanta Music Palace, Ujjain were searched. (2) goods of foreign origin valued at Rs. 1,07,480/- were seized under a panchnama drawn on the spot. (3) the goods of foreign origin were seized under a reasonable belief that the same were liable for confiscation under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. (4) the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... muggled. 5. Shri B.D. Bhagat, the learned JDR submitted that as per law, the sale proceeds were offered to the party. The goods have been rightly disposed of under the provisions of Section 110(1A) of the Customs Act. They were covered by the provisions of this Section. At the time of seizure, the only factor relevant is the reason to believe that the goods were liable to confiscation under the provisions of the Customs Act. At the time of seizure, the emphasis is on the goods and not so much on their value . It is only at the time of adjudication that the charges levelled in the show cause notice are established. It is open to the adjudicating authority to come to his own decision about the allegations, contraventions, valuation etc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This sub-section was inserted to provide for the procedure to be adopted for the disposal of certain seized goods having regard to their perishable nature or depreciation in their value with the passage of time, or other relevant circumstances (Statement of objects and reasons in the Bill). 8. Under sub-section (1B), the procedure adopted for the disposal of the goods specified under sub-section (1A) of Section 110, has been provided. The following goods have been specified under sub-section (1A), vide Notification No. GSR-87(E), dated 5-2-1986 (1) Liquors; (2) Primary cells and primary batteries including rechargeable batteries; (3) Wrist watches; including electronic wrist watches, watch movements, parts or components thereof; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een sold to a third party for value. Subsequently, the confiscation order had been set aside by the Collector of Central Excise on 6-5-1985. In the circumstances of that case, the Calcutta High Court had observed that the Government was bound to return the said gold or the value on the date the Collector of Central Excise set aside the confiscation order. It will be seen that even in that case, which pertained to the period prior to the insertion of sub-section (1A) in Section 110 the value at the time of the seizure was not considered relevant, and it was the value on the date on which the confiscation order has been set aside by the Collector of Central Excise, which alone was considered relevant. 11. In the case of Shyamlal Sharma v. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on the date of quashing of the confiscation, if the goods were not available having already been auctioned. The Tribunal had not mentioned the seizure value. 15. In the case of Giridharilal Kalyandas Advani v. U.O.I. [1992 (58) E.L.T. 453 (Bom.)], the goods concerned were gold ornaments. They were seized on 23-2-1980 from certified goldsmiths under the provisions of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968. On 22-2-1983, the Addl. Collector came to a finding that the gold under seizure belonged to the customers of the petitioners and was not liable to confiscation. The gold ornaments were reported to be missing from the office of the Supdt. Central Excise. 16. The Bombay High Court observed that the market value as on 22-2-1983 be refunded by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have not taken any plea that the procedure prescribed under sub-section (1A) of Section 110 of the Customs Act had not been followed. Accordingly it is presumed that the prescribed procedure for the disposal of the goods under consideration, was followed. 20. Accordingly, we observe that the appellants were entitled for receipt of the sale proceeds of the goods ordered to be released by the Addl. Collector of Customs, Indore under his order in original dated 21-4-1992, and not the value as shown in the panchnama drawn at the time of seizure. 21, We do not find any reason to differ with the findings of the Addl. Collector with regard to the absolute confiscation of the video cassettes. In the circumstances of the case, however, we waive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
