2018 (3) TMI 1554 - AT - Customs

Tribunal upholds gold smuggling confiscation under Customs Act, penalties for abetting, connected persons.

The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of 26 pieces of smuggled gold biscuits valued at Rs. 1.22 crores under the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants failed ... Smuggling - gold biscuits of foreign origin - case of appellant is that the gold purchased was imported by the supplier and for the business convenience, the same was transported again from Imphal to Kolkata after melting, to meet the demands of festival - appellant also claims that gold which was seized was not carrying any foreign origin mark - Held that: - the appellants have failed to establish that the goods found in their possession were not smuggled goods. Hence, they have failed to dislodge the presumption in terms of Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962. There is no reason to interfere with the conclusion of the Adjudicating Authority that the seized gold biscuits are liable for confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 - the penalties imposed on the persons who have actively participated in the act of smuggling gold are justified and hence upheld. Penalty on Sri Sashikanta Shinde and Sri Ajit Shinde, Dirctors and Sri Anand Kr. Agarwal, Accountant of M/s. Magna Projects - Held that: - By issuing duplicate invoices, the following persons-Sri Sashikanta Shinde and Sri Ajit Shinde, Dirctors and Sri Anand Kr. Agarwal, Accountant of M/s. Magna Projects have abeted smuggling and therefore, the penalties imposed on them are fully justified - penalty upheld. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. Issues: Smuggling of gold, Confiscation of seized gold, Penalties imposed on connected personsSmuggling of Gold:The case involves the smuggling of 26 pieces of gold biscuits of foreign origin, valued at Rs. 1.22 crores, caught with individuals at a railway station. The gold was seized by the Customs Department, leading to penalties on the appellants. The appellants claimed the gold was purchased from a supplier in Kolkata and transported to meet business demands. However, the Department contended that the seized gold did not match the purchased gold and was smuggled. The Tribunal found that the seized gold was indeed smuggled, as evidenced by discrepancies in documents and lack of proof of legitimate purchase, upholding the confiscation under the Customs Act, 1962.Confiscation of Seized Gold:The Adjudicating Authority ordered the confiscation of the seized gold under Section 111 (b) and (d) of the Customs Act, 1962, due to its nature as smuggled goods. The Tribunal examined the evidence, including invoices and transit challans, and concluded that the gold was indeed smuggled and did not correspond to legitimate purchases. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation, as the appellants failed to prove the gold's legality and dislodge the presumption of smuggling under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962.Penalties Imposed on Connected Persons:The penalties imposed on the Directors and Accountant of the supplier company, M/s. Magna Projects Pvt. Ltd., were upheld by the Tribunal. The Directors and Accountant were found to have abetted smuggling by issuing duplicate invoices to cover up the illegal activity. Despite attempts to justify the transactions, the Tribunal concluded that the penalties were justified based on the evidence presented. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, upholding the impugned order and penalties imposed on the connected persons involved in the smuggling of gold.