9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 415X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ially strong to possess the gold bar worth of Rs. 90 lakhs, still even as a person carrying this gold bars without proper documentary evidence, he would be required to be imposed with penalty u/s 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. However considering the fact that the Appellant is a small time gold melting person, I take the view that imposing penalty of Rs. 20 Lakhs on him when the absolutely confiscated gold bars are worth of Rs. 90 Lakhs, is very harsh on him. Only on this ground, I reduce the penalty from Rs. 20 Lakhs to Rs. 2 Lakhs. It is seen from the Appeal Papers that he has already deposited Rs. 1.5 Lakhs while filing the Appeal. After adjusting this amount, the Appellant is required to pay balance Rs. 50,000/- which should be fulfil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rson was not educated and was not maintaining any proper records of receipt and dispatch of the gold bars for his transactions. She submits that without proper investigation, purely based on presumptions and assumptions, the present Show Cause Notice was issued to the Appellant by excluding the actual owner of the gold bars. She submits that since gold was seized in Kolkata which amounts to Town Seizure , the Department cannot be allowed to assume that these gold bars are smuggled. She further submits that the Appellant had never claimed the ownership of gold bars and even now the absolute confiscation of gold bar is not being agitated by the Appellant. The Appellant is before the Tribunal only towards the penalty of Rs. 20 lakhs imposed on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before me. 5. I find that the gold bars have been seized in Kolkata which amounts to Town Seizure . Admittedly, all the gold bars were having foreign markings. Therefore, there is no doubt that the gold is of foreign origin only. The Appellant neither at the time of seizure nor subsequently could produce any licit documents towards the 17 gold bars. However, it is seen from the Statement given by him that he never claimed ownership of these 17 gold bars valued at Rs. 90,71,062/-. He has also been maintaining that these gold bars were given to him for melting purpose. It is also seen that when the Department issued a Notice under Section 150 of the Customs Act, 1962 seeking to dispose of the seized gold, he has sent a Reply on 12/06/2017 sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the Appellant would not be financially strong to possess the gold bar worth of Rs. 90 lakhs, still even as a person carrying this gold bars without proper documentary evidence, he would be required to be imposed with penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. 9. However considering the fact that the Appellant is a small time gold melting person, I take the view that imposing penalty of Rs. 20 Lakhs on him when the absolutely confiscated gold bars are worth of Rs. 90 Lakhs, is very harsh on him. Only on this ground, I reduce the penalty from Rs. 20 Lakhs to Rs. 2 Lakhs. 10. It is seen from the Appeal Papers that he has already deposited Rs. 1.5 Lakhs while filing the Appeal. After adjusting this amount, the Appellant is require ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
