9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (5) TMI 473X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Jodhpur since 1993; that in December 1995, he commenced trading in gold bullion also, that he had purchased 11 gold biscuits from M/s. Sanghvi Enterprises, Mumbai under Bill Nos. 210 and 202 dated 27-1-1996 on cash payment; that in order to get better price, he had sent 11 gold biscuits with his employee Abdul Rahim to Shillong for sale through one dealer G.C. Goel; that as said Goel and his son Sanjay Goel were out of station, Abdul Rahim started his journey back to Jodhpur and he was intercepted on 2-2-1996 at Paltan Bazar Guwahati and gold biscuits were seized under the Customs Act; that the Commissioner of Customs, under the impugned Order, confiscated the gold and imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000 on him besides imposing penalty on Ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ention in statements dated 2-2-1996 of Abdul Rahim and statements dated 3-2-1996 and 7-2-1996 of Shri Sanjay Goel that the gold biscuit in question were smuggled gold biscuit; that except for retracted statement of Abdul Rahim and statement of Sanjay Goyal recorded under duress while they were in custody, there is no independent reliable evidence to sustain the allegation of gold being smuggled one. He relied upon the decision in the case of Shanti Lal Soni v. C.C., Jaipur, 1995 (78) E.L.T. 151 (T) wherein it was held that The fact of the confession having been made during illegal custody and having been retracted at the first available opportunity leads to the conclusion that it was not true and voluntary. 4. Countering the arguments, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts relied upon have been mentioned in details in the show cause notice and some of the statements even have been annexed by him with the Memorandum of Appeal. Further the entire case of the Department as mentioned by ld. SDR, is based on the statement of Abdul Rahim which stands corroborated by Sanjay Goyal. In his first statement recorded immediately after the seizure of gold from him, Abdul Rahim has clearly deposed that he was sent by the Appellant to Shillong for collecting gold from Sanjay Goyal and he was given a receipt regardihg purchase of gold by the Appellant to cover the gold in his possession if seized. This statement has been retracted by Abdul Rahim only on 26-2-1996, that is after a lapse of considerable period. It has also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Surjit Singh Chabbra v. U.O.I., 1997 (89) E.L.T. 646 (S.C.) has held that confession though retracted is an admission and binds the petitioner. The decision in the case of Shanti Lal Soni, relied upon by the ld. Counsel for the Appellant, is not applicable to the facts of the present matter as in that case the statement was retracted at the earliest opportunity when the accused was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, in the application for bail. Moreover Judicial Magistrate had ordered the commencement of proceedings for the possible wrongful confinement. In these circumstances, the Tribunal in that case held that the statement was not voluntary and true. Abdul Rahim, I observe from the records has again stated in his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
