1986 (8) TMI 252 - AT - Customs

Tribunal upholds penalty under Gold Control Act, citing admissible evidence and appellant's role in smuggling activities.

The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act, finding the evidence admissible and sufficiently ... Evidence Issues Involved:1. Legality of the penalty imposed under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act.2. Admissibility and sufficiency of evidence, particularly the statement of the tindel, Shri Atham Fakir.3. Corroboration of the tindel's statement.4. Harshness of the penalty imposed.Detailed Analysis:1. Legality of the Penalty Imposed under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act:The appellant, Shri Sukar Naran, was penalized Rs. 10,00,000 under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968. The penalty was imposed by the Collector of Customs & Central Excise, Ahmedabad, following the interception of the vessel 'Jalaram Vishwas' by INS Brahmputtra, which was found carrying contraband goods, including gold, meant for delivery to the appellant. The Tribunal upheld the penalty, affirming the Collector's decision based on the evidence and legal provisions.2. Admissibility and Sufficiency of Evidence, Particularly the Statement of the Tindel, Shri Atham Fakir:The appellant's advocate contended that the evidence against the appellant was solely based on the statements of co-accused crew members, particularly Shri Atham Fakir, and lacked independent corroboration. The Tribunal examined this contention and found that the statement of Shri Atham Fakir, given on 18-2-1971, was detailed and included particulars about the smuggling operations, expenses, and coordination with the appellant. The Tribunal noted that the statement was recorded promptly after the seizure of the goods and was admissible under Section 108 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal referenced Supreme Court decisions (AIR 1970 S.C. 940, AIR 1970 S.C.C. 1065, AIR 1971 S.C. 1087) to support the admissibility of such statements.3. Corroboration of the Tindel's Statement:The Tribunal found sufficient corroboration for Shri Atham Fakir's statement. The corroborative evidence included:- The seizure of contraband goods from the vessel.- Accounts maintained by Shri Atham Fakir detailing expenses and repairs to the vessel.- Statements from other crew members and landing agents at Daman, confirming the smuggling operations and implicating the appellant.- Specific details such as the exchange of pre-arranged signals and half part of a Riyal note during the unloading of goods at Daman.The Tribunal concluded that the collective evidence provided a robust corroboration of the tindel's statement, justifying the penalty imposed.4. Harshness of the Penalty Imposed:The appellant's advocate argued that the penalty of Rs. 10,00,000 was excessively harsh. The Tribunal considered the value of the seized gold (Rs. 4,40,000) and the appellant's significant role in multiple smuggling operations. It noted that the penalty was within the legal limit, as the Collector could have imposed a maximum penalty of five times the value of the gold. The Tribunal found the penalty appropriate given the appellant's involvement in repeated smuggling activities and upheld the Collector's order.Conclusion:The Tribunal confirmed the Collector's order, rejecting the appeal. It held that the penalty under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act was legally justified, the evidence against the appellant was admissible and sufficiently corroborated, and the penalty imposed was not excessively harsh considering the circumstances.