Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (2) TMI 517

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Order-in-Original dated 13th January, 2023. As requested by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, till a decision is taken in respect of the representations of the Petitioner, status-quo should be maintained in respect of the said gold. Further, in the event of the Petitioner succeeding in proving its case, the Respondents will have to be directed to restore to the Petitioner the said gold or equivalent amount of gold or to compensate the Petitioner by making payment of an amount equivalent to the market value of the said gold as on date. Respondent No. 1 is directed to consider the representations made by the Petitioner by its letters dated 19th June, 2019, 13th September, 2019, 19th December, 2019, 3rd January, 2020 and 24th Oct .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... respect to confiscation of subject property i.e. 511.60 gms of Gold taken from the custody of M/s. Marudhar Express Service Pvt. Ltd. on 14/06/2019 at M/s. Concor Air Limited Ville Parle (East). 3. The Petitioner is a jeweller who conducts business in multiple cities in India. It is the case of the Petitioner that, it is the owner of 511.60 grams of gold ( the said gold ), which has been purchased by it. It is also the case of the Petitioner that the said gold has an Indian mark i.e. MMTC marked gold. 4. It is further the case of the Petitioner that it had approached Respondent No. 5, which is an entity engaged in the Logistics Business, for the purpose of sending the said gold to one M/s. Manak Jewellers Private Limited on job wor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Petitioner. The said Show Cause Notice was not issued to the Petitioner. Further, the said Show Cause Notice did not consider the e-mail issued by the Petitioner informing Respondent Nos. 1 2 that it was the owner of the said gold. 8. The Petitioner addressed a letter dated 19th June, 2019 to Respondent No.2 wherein the Petitioner stated that it had sent the said gold for making of ornaments to Manak Jewellers Private Limited, Mumbai, on job work basis, through Respondent No. 5. The Petitioner informed that the said gold was owned by the Petitioner and not by Respondent No. 5, who was merely acting as an agent of the Petitioner for delivering the said gold. The Petitioner did not receive any response to the said letter. 9. The P .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... imposing penalties. The said Order also records that many persons, including the Petitioner, had addressed letters claiming the seized gold. The said Order further records that the said parties had claimed ownership of the seized gold and had submitted documents to substantiate their claims. Since establishing the claim of ownership or rejecting the same was in the domain of investigation, Respondent No.3, as an adjudicating authority, having no jurisdiction to initiate an investigation into the said claims, was refraining from passing any observation or order or imposing any penalty on the said parties. The said Order also records that the aforesaid parties may take their cases to the appropriate forum. The Order further records that the s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d as on date. 19. For the aforesaid reasons, we hereby pass the following orders:- (a) Respondent No. 1 is directed to consider the representations made by the Petitioner by its letters dated 19th June, 2019, 13th September, 2019, 19th December, 2019, 3rd January, 2020 and 24th October, 2020 and take a decision in respect of the same within a period of six months from the date of intimation of this Order, after giving a personal hearing to the Petitioner, and without being influenced by the Order-in-Original dated 13th January, 2023; (b) Till Respondent No. 1 takes a decision on the aforesaid representations made by the Petitioner, status-quo be maintained in respect of the said gold claimed by the Petitioner; (c) In the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates