9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In these appeals which have been preferred against the common order-in-original, the appellants contested the imposition of penalty and confiscation of gold bars. 2.On 2-6-1998, Shri Lalit Kumar Khatri, appellant, while traveling in a bus from Ahmedabad to Jaipur was intercepted by the Customs Officers and recovery of 15 gold bars was effected from him. He could not produce the documents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been purchased from appellant, Shri V.K. Patel. He produced the Bill No. 202 dated 1-6-1998 in the name of his father, Shri Motilal Khatri @ Mohanlal Khatri issued by Shri V.K. Patel. Even Shri V.K. Patel in his statement admitted the issuance of that Bill on receipt of full sale consideration in favour of Shri Motilal Khatri @ Mohanlal Khatri, appellant. He further disclosed the name of Shri Cho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Lalit Khatri, was carrying with him also pertained to the legal acquisition of the 8 gold bars purchased earlier from M/s. Mahavir Bullion Co., Ahmedabad, and the correctness of that Bill was even accepted by the said company. 4.In the face of said overwhelming documentary evidence, it could not be said that the seized gold bars were smuggled goods so as to warrant confiscation and imposition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
