2000 (10) TMI 154 - AT - Customs

Tribunal upholds silver smuggling confiscation, penalties. Appellants fail to prove legal possession.

The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of silver bars and coins, as well as vehicles used in transportation, along with personal penalties imposed on ... Smuggling - Evidence -Burden of proof Issues Involved:1. Confiscation of silver bars and coins.2. Personal penalties imposed on individuals.3. Validity and voluntariness of statements recorded.4. Evidence supporting the smuggled nature of the silver.5. Burden of proof regarding the origin of the silver.6. Confiscation of vehicles used in transportation.7. Personal penalty on the truck owner.Detailed Analysis:1. Confiscation of Silver Bars and Coins:The Commissioner of Customs, Shillong, ordered the absolute confiscation of 1795 pieces of silver bars valued at Rs. 27,08,682/- and 7500 pieces of silver coins valued at Rs. 5,43,750/- belonging to two individuals. Additionally, 8244 pieces of silver coins valued at Rs. 5,97,690/- were confiscated from another individual. The confiscation was based on the inability of the individuals to produce documents proving licit possession of the silver.2. Personal Penalties Imposed on Individuals:Personal penalties of Rs. 5 lakhs each were imposed on two individuals, while Rs. 1 lakh each was imposed on two others. A penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was also imposed on the truck owner. The penalties were based on the involvement of these individuals in the transportation and possession of the smuggled silver.3. Validity and Voluntariness of Statements Recorded:The appellants argued that their statements were coerced and not voluntary, as they were recorded in a hotel where customs officers were camping instead of the customs office. However, the Tribunal found no merit in this argument, noting that the officers were camping at the hotel due to the declaration of Assam as a disturbed area. The Tribunal also noted that the medical certificates did not indicate any torture or coercion.4. Evidence Supporting the Smuggled Nature of the Silver:The Tribunal evaluated the evidentiary value of the statements and the actual recovery of the goods. It was noted that the initial statement made on 1-12-1990 was not retracted and contained facts that could only be known to the deponents. The statements were corroborated by the drivers of the jeeps and the truck owner. The presence of secret cavities in the jeeps and Burmese inscriptions on the wrapping papers further supported the smuggled nature of the silver.5. Burden of Proof Regarding the Origin of the Silver:The appellants argued that the burden of proving the silver's foreign origin lay on the Revenue. However, the Tribunal held that the initial burden was properly discharged by the Revenue through the confessions and other evidence. The appellants failed to provide any evidence of legal possession or acquisition of the silver. The Tribunal also noted that the silver bullion had been made a notified item, shifting the burden of proof to the appellants.6. Confiscation of Vehicles Used in Transportation:The two trucks involved in the transportation of the silver were confiscated, with an option to redeem them on payment of a redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/- each. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act, as the trucks were used in the transportation of smuggled silver.7. Personal Penalty on the Truck Owner:A personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed on the truck owner, based on his admission and the statements of the driver. The Tribunal found no reason to differ from the adjudicating authority's conclusion that the truck owner was involved in the transportation of smuggled goods.Conclusion:The Tribunal rejected all the appeals and upheld the impugned order, including the confiscation of the silver and vehicles, and the imposition of personal penalties. The decision was based on the overwhelming evidence supporting the smuggled nature of the silver and the involvement of the individuals in its transportation and possession.