9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 696X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to show that the Appellant was earlier purchasing the gold bars or silver ornaments from M/s. Lalji Bhai Kanji Bhai Soni and there is a running account in this regard - appeal dismissed - decided against Appellant. - C/322/2006 - A/212/KOL/2009 - Dated:- 13-4-2009 - Shri S.S. Kang, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Sharma, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. Heard both sides. The Appellant filed this Appeal against the impugned Order whereby 13 pcs. of gold bars weighing 1516.32 grams. valued at Rs. 7,26,317.00 were confiscated along with the Indian Currency of Rs. 1151.00 and penalty of Rs. 10,000.00 has been imposed on the Appellant under the Customs Act, 1962. 2. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ently, handed over to the Customs Authorities, therefore, the onus is on the Revenue to show that the same was smuggled into India. In support of their claim, the Appellant relied on various decisions some of which read as follows : (i) 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1365 (S.C.) - Gian Chand Other v. State of Punjab; (ii) 1992 (58) E.L.T. 54 (P H) - Assitt. Collector v. Daljit Singh Others; (iii) 2001 (138) E.L.T. 1037 (Tri.-Kolkata) - Nirmala Mitra v. CC, Patna. (iv) 2006 (75) R.L.T. 894 (CESTAT-Ban.) - E. Eswara Reddy Anr. v. CC, Hyderabad-II. 4. The Appellant also submitted that Appellant produced the bill regarding purchase of gold from Ahmedabad. This evidence was disbelieved by the lower authorities on the ground that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the purchase of gold from Ahmedabad. It was only on 25-11-94, for the first time, the Appellant by writing a letter to the Customs Authorities mentioned about the purchase of the gold from Ahmedabad. It is also submitted that the Revenue seized the gold bars having foreign markings, whereas the bill produced by the Appellant does not mention anything regarding the markings. The gold was sold on credit and as per the Appellant, the gold was purchased through one dealer of Kolkata; but the bill produced by the Appellant does not mention the name of the dealer. In the statement of the person who issued the bill stated that the sale proceeds of the gold in question were not received by him till 2005. The contention of the Revenue is that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were not received by them till 2005. The claim of the Appellant is that the gold was purchased through one Jeweller of Kolkata. There is no mention of the name of Jeweller on the sale bill. The first statement of the Appellant was recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 on 10-9-94, where he had not mentioned anything regarding purchase of the gold from Ahmedabad. Thereafter, another statement was recorded with the permission of the court, when the Appellant was under judicial custody on 23-9-94. This statement was recorded in the presence of two jail officials. In the statement also, the Appellant reiterated the earlier statement and had not mentioned anything regarding the purchase of gold from Ahmedabad. It was only on 25-11-9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
