Tribunal upholds gold confiscation, allows redemption under Customs Act.

The Tribunal upheld the Order-in-Appeal, confirming the absolute confiscation of gold seized from passengers traveling from Mumbai to Kerala by bus. While the Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the penalty for the appellant, the Tribunal determined that the confiscated gold had become prohibited goods, granting the adjudicating authority discretion to allow redemption. The Tribunal held that the authority could permit redemption under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962, and rejected the appeals, maintaining the absolute confiscation without interference.

---

---

Issues:
1. Confiscation and penalties imposed on gold seized from passengers.
2. Reduction of penalty for the appellant by the Commissioner (Appeals).
3. Discretion of adjudicating authority to release confiscated gold.

Issue 1: Confiscation and penalties imposed on gold seized from passengers:
The case involved the interception of three passengers carrying gold from Mumbai to Kerala by bus. The gold, along with foreign currencies, was seized, and show-cause notices (SCNs) were issued proposing confiscation and penalties. The lower authorities confirmed absolute confiscation while imposing penalties. The details of gold seized from each passenger were provided, along with the corresponding orders and dates.

Issue 2: Reduction of penalty for the appellant by the Commissioner (Appeals):
The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the absolute confiscation of seized gold but reduced the penalty for the appellant in each case to a specific amount. The appeals were filed by the appellant against the Order-in-Appeal (OIO) confirming the confiscation and penalties. The appellant's counsel argued that the gold was purchased for sale in Kerala, and while liable for confiscation, it should not be absolutely confiscated but redeemed.

Issue 3: Discretion of adjudicating authority to release confiscated gold:
The main issue was whether the adjudicating authority had the discretion to release the confiscated gold or if redemption was allowed on payment of a fine in lieu of confiscation. The relevant provisions of Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 were analyzed. The appellant's counsel referred to various High Court judgments supporting the redemption of confiscated gold. However, the Department reiterated the findings of the OIO and Order-in-Appeal (OIA), citing previous judgments upholding absolute confiscation of gold.

The Tribunal examined the legal provisions and precedents cited by both parties. It concluded that the confiscated gold had acquired the nature of prohibited goods, allowing the adjudicating authority the discretion to permit redemption. The Tribunal held that in such cases, the adjudicating authority "may" permit redemption, and it could not interfere with the authority's discretion. Citing previous judgments and legal interpretations, the Tribunal rejected the appeals, upholding the Order-in-Appeal without any intervention.

---