9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 786X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to substantiate the allegation that there was an attempted export of the said gold jewellary. The appellant has submitted documentary evidence in the form of three invoices claiming ownership of the gold jewellery seized. There is no investigation conducted by the department to ascertain the genuineness of the invoices. Shri Chandi Biswas in his statement dated 30.10.2018 stated that he was permanent staff of Shri Goutam Halder and the gold was handed over to him by the said Shri Goutam Halder for handing it over to M/s. Majumdar Jewellers. The investigation has not brought in any evidence to disprove this claim. Accordingly, the allegation of attempted export of the gold jewellery in the impugned order is not substantiated. In view of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the reasonable belief that the goods were attempted to be exported illegally to Bangladesh through unauthorized route. After investigation, a show cause notice was issued proposing confiscation of the gold jewelley seized. On adjudication, the Ld.Commissioner confiscated the gold jewelley vide Order-in-Original dated 21.02.2020. Penalty was also imposed on all the three appellants under section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. On appeal, the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the confiscation and penalties imposed in the Order-in-Original. Against the said order, all the three appellants have filed the present appeals. 3. The Ld.Counsel for the appellants submits that there was no attempt to export the gold ornaments as alleged in the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tiate the allegation that there was an attempted export of the said gold jewellary. I find that during the course of investigation, Shri Goutam Halder has submitted three invoices No.37 dated 19.07.2018, No.42 dated 13.09.2018 and No.47 dated 30.10.2018 for claiming the ownership of the gold. The adjudicating authority has dismissed these documents as these invoices do not bear the GST registration number. Accordingly, he held that they are not authentic documents and not considered as evidence to substantiate the claim ownership of the seized gold ornaments. 7. I find that the gold jewellery was seized from the domestic market area. On testing, the gold jewellery were found to be having purity of 91.6%. Thus, they are not foreign orig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
