9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 558X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epartment made investigation to the said shop and subsequently asked statement from the shop owner. Made investigation at M/s. Jalan Co. Pvt. Ltd. wherefrom the said shop used to purchase the gold bars. But the Department failed to obtain a final statement from M/s. Jalan Co. to the effect that the seized Australian gold biscuits had not been sold by them to M/s. Guinea Palace of Midnapore. He has also observed that the shop of Midnapore used to purchase gold bars from M/s. Indian Overseas Bank, Amrotolla St. Branch, 44, Rupchand Roy St., Calcutta-7. But no enquiry at any time been conducted to verify the veracity of the statement given by the owner of M/s. Guinea Palace to know whether the seized gold bars were sold by the said bank for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. He admitted the smuggled nature of the gold biscuit and his involvement is proved. The above facts clearly indicate that the impugned goods were smuggled into India in illegal manner in contravention of the policy. The burden of proof under Section 123 of Customs Act was on Respondent. There is no evidence or the recorded proof that the statement under Section 108 of Customs Act was recorded coercion. Therefore, he submits that the appeal is contrary to facts and deserves to be set aside. 3. Ld. Consultant supports the impugned order. In present case the gold biscuits were acquired from a gold dealer firm. The Respondent has discharged their burden properly. The Respondent has submitted their claim petition along with some documents of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealer under cover of proper vouchers and the seller had also confirmed the same. In this respect he cited the ratio of the judgment in the case of S.K. Chains v. Comm. of Customs (Mumbai) reported in 2001 (127) E.L.T. 415 (T) Mum. Considering the detailed facts of the case I find that the above ratio of judgment applies squarely in the instant case. 4. In present case the Commissioner of Appeals has held that the finding of the lower authority is contrary to the record in as much as in Show Cause Notice, it had been clearly recorded that on 19-3-2001, the appellant submitted 04 pcs. of T.T. gold Bars 999 which was purchased by him from M/s. Guinea Palace Ltd. Midnapore and he also retracted his earlier statement. Thereafter, the Department ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
