9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (1) TMI 257X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been transferred to the Tribunal under Section 131-B(2) of the Customs Act. It is an appeal against the order of the Appellate Collector of Customs upholding confiscation of one gold piece valued at ₹ 430/- under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, Indian currency amounting to ₹ 12,790/- under Section 121 ibid and penalty of ₹ 1,000/- under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transported smuggled gold on behalf of his brother-in-law Shri Mohamed Yusuf Ahmed to the purchaser Shri Vimalchand and carried the sale proceeds of the currency from Shri Vimalchand to his brother-in-law Shri Mohamed Yusuf Ahmed. 4. As regards the levy of penalty it has been argued that the Asstt. Collector levied the penalty for transporting the smuggled gold on behalf of his brother-in-law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... article is bullion or jewellery viz., locket is not very relevant as Section 123 applies to gold and manufactures thereof. Even if the same is held to be a manufacture of gold, the legal position will not change. On the other hand, we have seen from the description of the article seized in the panchanama that it is a gold bullion and not a gold article. The markings on the piece of gold show that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed of proof. On the other hand, Shri Jumma Abdul Gani has explained the possession of this amount. Whatever be the merits of the explanation, the order of confiscation cannot be sustained merely on the grounds of presumption that this was a commission for carrying the smuggled gold and the sale proceeds and that the commission was paid out of such sale proceeds. In the absence of any evidence to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
