9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (1) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ur gold biscuit pieces were seized by the Special Police Establishment Lokayukta from the bank locker of the respondent No. 2 and thereafter the said biscuit pieces were handed over to the Customs authority under the Customs Act (for brevity 'the Act'). Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued for confiscation of gold biscuits and imposition of penalty. The adjudicating authority, on consideration of facts and circumstances, released two pieces of biscuits in favour of respondent No. 2 on the ground that the said biscuit pieces were not of any foreign making. The other two gold biscuit pieces were confiscated on a personal penalty of Rs. 10,000/- each on the respondents, It is worth mentioning here that respondent No. 2 is wife of respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the reasonable belief that they are smuggled goods, the burden of proving that they are not smuggled goods shall be - in a case where such seizure is(a) made from the possession of any person,- (i) on the person from whose possession the goods were seized; and (ii) if any person, other than the person from whose possession the goods were seized, claims to be the owner thereof, also on such other person; in any other case, on the person,(b) if any, who claims to be owner of the goods so seized. This Section shall apply to gold, (and manufactures,(2) thereof,) watches, any other class of goods which the Central Government may by notification in the Official Gazette specify." 6.Submission of Mr. Namdeo is that the Tribunal has erred i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Punjab - 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1365 (S.C.) = AIR 1962 SC 496 wherein the constitution Bench while dealing with the concept of seized goods under the Sea Customs Act expressed the view as under :- "Sections 178, 178A and 180, which have to be read together, draw distinction between seizure under the Act and a seizure under provisions of other laws. A seizure under the Act is one for which the authority to seize is conferred by the Act and in the context it could be referred to as a seizure under S. 178. The seizure from the owner of the property under S. 180 is not a seizure under the Act but by a police officer effecting the seizure under other provisions of the law, for instance the Criminal Procedure Code. The last part of sub-s. (1) of Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e goods are originally seized from the possession of the accused, the accused loses possession by seizure under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and thereafter, the possession vests in the police authorities and hence, the Customs authorities though get the custody of these goods, they cannot be said to have seized under the Act so as to throw the burden on the accused to prove that the gold in question was not smuggled goods. 10.At this juncture, we may profitably refer to a two-Judge Bench decision of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax and others v. Tarsem Kumar and Another 1986 (26) E.L.T. 10 (S.C.) = [1986] 161 ITR Page 505. In the aforesaid case while dealing with Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
