2000 (11) TMI 246 - AT - Customs

Tribunal upholds gold confiscation and penalties based on corroborated evidence and lack of coercion in retractions.

RS. VERMA Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CALCUTTA

RS. VERMA Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CALCUTTA - 2001 (137) E.L.T. 652 (Tri. - Kolkata) Issues Involved:1. Confiscation of gold and imposition of personal penalties.2. Reliance on incriminating statements and retractions.3. Corroboration of statements and recovery of gold.Issue 1: Confiscation of gold and imposition of personal penalties:The case involved the confiscation of eight gold biscuits and the imposition of personal penalties on the two appellants. The Customs Officers intercepted the appellants based on information and found them carrying gold biscuits. Despite no contraband found during the search, one of the appellants admitted to concealing the gold in his rectum. The gold biscuits were recovered from him in the presence of witnesses. The authorities seized the gold as the appellants failed to provide evidence of legal acquisition. Adjudication proceedings resulted in the confiscation of gold and imposition of penalties.Issue 2: Reliance on incriminating statements and retractions:The appellants argued that the case was solely based on their incriminating statements, which they later retracted during bail applications. However, the Tribunal noted that the retraction was made in a mechanical manner and lacked substantial evidence of coercion. The statements detailed movements, procurement, and past activities related to smuggled gold, providing specific information known only to the appellants. The Tribunal rejected the argument that one appellant did not understand English, as he endorsed the statement in English. The retraction was deemed insufficient to invalidate the statements.Issue 3: Corroboration of statements and recovery of gold:Both appellants provided statements corroborating each other, detailing the concealment of gold. The recovery of gold from one appellant's rectum before witnesses further supported the statements. The Tribunal found the statements consistent and rejected the claim of no actual recovery of gold. Despite reducing the penalties due to the appellant's role as a carrier, the Tribunal upheld the confiscation and penalties based on the corroborated statements and physical evidence.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the confiscation of gold and imposition of penalties based on the corroborated statements, recovery of gold, and lack of substantial evidence to invalidate the statements or prove coercion during retractions. The judgment highlighted the importance of detailed statements and corroborative evidence in such cases.