9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (9) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Mukesh Mehta appeared. They reiterated submissions made in the revision application and emphasised inter alia that the seizing officer did not have any reasonable belief that the loose diamonds and diamonds studded jewellery were smuggled goods; that thereby provisions of Sec. 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 were not available to the Department. Nay, the fact that goods were of Indian origin, had been their case from the beginning; that diamonds were received on approval basis from a Bombay firm M/s. Arihanta Diamonds and some of diamonds studded jewellery belonged to the applicant's family and the rest to wife of one Shri K.M. Modi for whom it was got manufactured from one Shri Satyanarayan Dass. The learned advocates also emphasised tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods were of foreign origin so much so that even the appraiser while examining the goods did not say anything regarding foreign origin of the goods. It was accordingly pleaded that the impugned goods may be released and imposition of penalty be set aside. 6. Govt. have gone through the facts of the case and considered the pleadings. 7. The law is well settled that presumption under Section 123(1) of the Customs Act can be raised only if the following four conditions are satisfied. (i) There should be a seizure under the provisions of the Customs Act; (ii) Seizure must have been from the possession of the person proceeded against, or the one claiming ownership of the goods; (iii) Seizure should have been made in the reasonable be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred by the applicant that they had indicated source of diamonds being from Bombay initially itself. As show cause notice was issued subsequently after about a month enquiries should have been made by the Department from Bombay. In the circumstances, it is felt that there being nothing to indicate that the loose diamonds were of foreign origin and for the above aforesaid reasons it is difficult to sustain the charge of the department that the said diamonds were smuggled. Likewise there is nothing to indicate that the jewellery consisting of one piece of pendant with chain, one pair of ear-balli, one piece ear ring (not a pair which shows that these were personal use items) and one ring of white metal studded with diamonds also do n6t seem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
