2021 (3) TMI 1204 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Upholds Penalties for Smuggling Gold Bars

The Tribunal upheld the reduced penalties imposed on the appellants under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. Despite the appellants' claims of being ... Reduction in quantum of penalty - Smuggling - Gold - defence of appellants is the retraction statement of these appellants wherein they have inter alia mentioned that the ‘Officers searched their Workshop in Ayanavaram when they were doing their job with regard to melting of the Gold Pieces converting to Gold Rings which was given by the customers - HELD THAT:- The retraction statement itself hints that they were aware/conscious of what job they were carrying on; the very fact that they were involved in melting gold of the alleged huge quantity cumulatively points to the modus operandi in converting smuggled gold bar into crude gold. In the case of their employer also, Shri Alaudeen has nowhere furnished or even offered to furnish any registration for having engaged in the job of the nature they were involved in, nor has he come forward to furnish the details of their so-called customers, including such customer who wanted the melting of foreign marked gold bars. If they were aware of the identity of their customers, then there was no need for the first appellant herein to go to the brokers in N.S.C. Bose Road to sell off the melted gold, which fact has neither been denied nor rebutted in their retraction. The melting activity was carried on by all three of them jointly to hide the identity of the foreign marked gold bars, make them appear as crude gold and sell them locally, which clearly attracts the penal provision of Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Appeal dismissed. Issues:Challenge to reduction of penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962.Analysis:1. The case involved a challenge to the reduction of penalties imposed on the appellants under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants were accused of aiding their employer in melting smuggled foreign marked gold bars to make them appear as crude gold. A search at the employer's premises revealed incriminating evidence implicating the appellants in the illegal activity.2. The Revenue contended that both appellants admitted to their roles in aiding their employer in smuggling gold, melting it, and selling it to brokers. Statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act on the day of the search supported the Revenue's case against the appellants.3. The initial penalties imposed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs were reduced on appeal, leading to the present challenge. The appellants argued that they were merely employees following instructions and lacked the requisite mens rea for the offenses. They also claimed that no incriminating documents were found to link them directly to the smuggling activity.4. The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both sides. It noted that the appellants' retraction of their statements did not absolve them of guilt, especially considering the nature of the activities they were involved in. The appellants' involvement in melting smuggled gold bars and selling them locally indicated their complicity in the illegal scheme.5. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no merit in the appellants' case and dismissed the appeals, upholding the reduced penalties imposed by the First Appellate Authority. The decision was based on the appellants' active participation in the illegal activity, as evidenced by the statements and circumstances surrounding the case.In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment affirmed the penalties imposed on the appellants for their involvement in aiding their employer in smuggling and melting gold bars, emphasizing their active role in the illegal scheme despite attempts to distance themselves from the criminal activities.