9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 863X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 62. As per Section 110-A of the Customs Act, 1962, any goods, documents or things seized or bank account provisionally attached, pending the order of the adjudicating authority, may be released to the owner or the bank account holder on taking a bond from him in the proper form with such security and conditions as the adjudicating authority may require. Thereafter, even in the case of option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation, Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 will come into play. In the present case, the gold chains, which have been seized from the petitioner, is not a prohibited item. Hence, the Adjudication Officer ultimately, shall give an option to redeem the confiscated gold jewels. In the present case, the petitioner is ready ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 125 of the Customs Act, 1962, gives rights to the owner or from whom the goods have been seized to redeem such goods on payment of fine. Further, the Courts consistently held that goods can be handed over on executing 50% of the Bank guarantee on the duty amount. In view of the same, the impugned order is quashed and the petitioner is directed to pay 50% customs duty and also execute 50% of the Bank guarantee in lieu of customs duty. And on such payment / execution of the Bank guarantee, the respondents are directed to hand over the gold chains to the petitioner within two weeks from thereon. This Writ Petition is disposed of. - Honourable Mrs. Justice S. Srimathy For the Petitioner : Mr.V.Malaiyendran For the Respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dly held that gold is not prohibited item, but only restricted item. Bringing the restricted item by violating certain conditions would not give right for the respondents to detain and confiscate gold articles. Since it is only a restricted item and it can be handed over to the owner or to the passenger from whom the same has been seized. In support of his submission, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied on various judgments. 5. In the case of Vaibhav Sampat More vs. National Investigation Agency, through its Chief Investigation Officer [Crl.A.No.115 of 2022, dated 03.06.2022] the Hon ble Delhi High Court has held that import of gold is not prohibited, but restricted subject to prescribed quantity on payment of dut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gold jewels in question shall be released forthwith. Thereafter, the Department filed Rev.Appl.No.89 of 2011 before the First Bench of this Court. The First Bench of this Court, finding that there is no error apparent on the face of the record, vide order dated 25.04.2011, dismissed the said Review Application. Aggrieved over the same, the Department filed S.L.P.(Civil)Nos.13870 and 13871 of 2011 before the Hon'ble Apex Court. Since the Hon'ble Apex Court was not inclined to entertain the S.L.Ps., the same were permitted to be withdrawn and accordingly, vide order dated 12.05.2011, the Hon'ble Apex Court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions as not pressed. 7. Further, following the above said decision of the Hon'ble Div ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation, Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 will come into play. As per Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962, whenever confiscation of any goods is authorized by the Act, the Officer adjudging finds that the importation or exportation of any goods is prohibited under the Act or under any other law for the time being in force, shall, in the case of any other goods, give to the owner of the goods or where such owner is not known, the person from whose possession or custody such goods have been seized, an option to pay in lieu of confiscation such fine as the said Officer thinks fit. In case of prohibited items, an option to pay in lieu of confiscation such fine would arise. In the present case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Foreign Trade Act. The High Court dealing with the same has aptly noticed that Section 11(8) and (9) read with Rule 17(2) of the Foreign Trade (Regulation) Rules, 1993 provides for confiscation of goods in the event of contravention of the Act, Rules or Orders but which may be released on payment of redemption charges equivalent to the market value of the goods. Section 3(3) of the Foreign Trade Act provides that any order of prohibition made under the Act shall apply mutatis mutandis as deemed to have been made under Section 11 of the Customs Act also. Section 18A of the Foreign Trade Act reads that it is in addition to and not in derogation of other laws. Section 125 of the Customs Act vests discretion in the authority to levy fine in li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
