9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (3) TMI 140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 4000/- within thirty days. A penalty of Rs. 250/- was also imposed on the petitioner. 2. Petitioner challenged the order in appeal, which was ultimately dealt with by the Customs, Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. Pending appeal, he had moved the Tribunal for stay of operation of the order of adjudication Ext. P1, but no order appears to have been passed thereon. The Tribunal disposed of the appeal on June 12, 1984 by which the order of confiscation and imposition of penalty was confirmed, but the redemption fine was reduced from Rs. 4000/- to Rs. 2000/-. A copy of the Tribunal's order is Ext. P10. 3. The Petitioner, thereafter, approached the Assistant Collector with a r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n cases, to the Appellate Collector with second appeal to the Tribunal, and in others, directly to the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal is subject to reference to this Court, on questions of law arising out of it. The appeal lies on questions of fact and law. The order of confiscation as well as the quantum of the redemption fine are open to challenge. The Appellate Authority possess all the powers of the adjudication authority, and could pass any order appropriate to the matter as it deems fit. It could set aside the order of confiscation and direct the gold to be returned or it could remit the matter for fresh consideration. When all these contingencies are possible, it will be inappropriate and improper for the respondents to deal wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deposit; should be he defeated of his right by appropriation of the gold to Government in the meanwhile ? The advantage of any variation, even in the redemption fine, must ensure to the benefit of the party. The order of the appellate authority should be enabled to be worked out, and the benefit given to the party concerned. In other words, the owner of the gold must be enabled to redeem it on payment of the reduced amount of redemption fine. Otherwise it will be rendering the order of the appellate authority ineffective and inoperative. Such a consequence is abhorrent to law. Respondents were not therefore justified in rejecting the petitioner's claim for redemption with the plea that they had appropriated the gold to Government in the me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... another department of the Government. Similarly if the gold and gold ornaments were melted, it only resulted in change of form, and the Government could return such gold or its value to the party concerned. Both in equity and in law status quo ante prior to the passing of the confiscation order ought to be restored. 11. The fact that the time fixed by the Collector in this case for payment of the redemption fine was not extended is again immaterial. The Department should have apprised the Tribunal of the non-redemption in time and of the fact of the gold having been sent to the Mint. Having defaulted in doing so, they cannot subsequently turn round and deprive the petitioner of availing of the benefit of reduced redemption fine allowed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
