9911796707
TMI Blog1961 (11) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For The Respondent : P. K. Chatterjee and T. M. Sen JUDGMENT : AYYANGAR, J.-This appeal comes before us by virtue of leave granted by this Court under Art. 136(1) of the constitution and is directed against the judgment and order of the Punjab High Court by which a Writ Petition filed before it by the appellants, under Art. 226 of the constitution was summarily dismissed. The point raised for our consideration relates to the legality of an order of confiscation, by the Customs Authorities, of certain gold belonging to the appellants on the ground of its being smuggled. The appellants are the partners of a Joint Hindu Family firm carrying on business in Bombay in inter alia gold and jewellery. On September 14, 1954, the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he result already stated. It will be seen from the above narrative that the case is not covered by s. 178 (A) of the Sea Customs Act which was enacted by Central Act 21 of 1955 since the seizure and the proceedings in this case were long anterior to the enactment of that section and cannot obviously be governed by its provisions. For the reason that s. 178 (A) was in force at the stage of the appeals from the order of the Collector of Customs to the Central Board of Revenue and the Central Government and possibly under the impression that their case had been decided by throwing on them the burden of proving that the gold was not smuggled, the appellants raised in their Writ Petition to the Punjab High Court points regarding the construct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9 of the Sea Customs Act thereby establishing an offence attracting the provisions of Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act. It was not disputed that if there was material to support this decision the appeal must fail. The conclusion of the Collector involves findings on two distinct matters: (1) that the gold which was the subject of adjudication was of foreign origin, and (2) that gold had been imported in contravention of the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act. Mr. Viswanatha Sastri-learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that though the several facts mentioned by the Collector in paragraph 5 of his order which form the basis of the finding recorded in paragraph 6 might show that the gold was of foreign origin, there was no evidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his finding about the gold being smuggled; the Collector has referred to the conduct of the appellants in connection with (a) the credibility of the story about the purchase of this gold from three parties, (b) the price at which the gold was stated to have been purchased which was less than the market price, and (c) the hurry exhibited in trying to get the gold melted at the refinery with a small bit of silver added so as to reduce the fineness of the gold and thus approximate the resultant product to licit gold found in the market. These were undoubtedly relevant pieces of evidence which bore on the question regarding the character of the gold, whether it was licit or illicit. Learned Counsel is, therefore, not right in his submission re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
