Dismissed appeals due to absence, appellant penalized for contraband gold proceeds possession, penalty upheld after challenges.

The appeals (C/643 and 661/87MAS) were dismissed for default as the appellants were absent without representation. Appellant Maricayar was penalized Rs. 25,000 under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, for possession of currency believed to be proceeds from contraband gold. Despite challenges to the legality of the search and seizure, the tribunal deemed Maricayar's statement voluntary and upheld the penalty, reducing it to Rs. 15,000. The tribunal confirmed Maricayar's involvement in the contraband gold trade and dismissed the appeal with the modified penalty amount.

---

---

Issues:
1. Dismissal of appeals for default.
2. Imposition of penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 1: Dismissal of appeals for default
The appeals (C/643 and 661/87MAS) were dismissed for default as the appellants were absent without representation despite being specifically adjourned. The dismissal was in accordance with Rule 20 of the CEGAT procedure rules, 1982.

Issue 2: Imposition of penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962
Appellant Maricayar was penalized Rs. 25,000 for possession of currency believed to be proceeds from contraband gold. The search conducted based on prior information led to the recovery of a substantial amount from Maricayar's premises. Maricayar admitted the currency represented the sale proceeds of contraband gold biscuits and implicated others. The penalty was imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.

The appellant's counsel argued that Maricayar's inculpatory statement was coerced and retracted, challenging the legality of the search and seizure. However, the tribunal found the statement voluntary and true, supported by corroborative statements from other appellants. The delay in retractions by other appellants weakened the coercion claim. The tribunal rejected the argument that an illegal search would vitiate the seizure, citing legal precedents.

The tribunal analyzed the evidence, including incriminating chits recovered, and found Maricayar's involvement in the contraband gold trade established. Despite discrepancies in calculations, the tribunal upheld the penalty based on the evidence linking Maricayar to the illegal activities. The tribunal reduced the penalty to Rs. 15,000 considering Maricayar's lack of prior offenses, role as a house broker, and ongoing criminal prosecution.

In conclusion, the tribunal confirmed the findings against Maricayar and reduced the penalty while dismissing the appeal with the modified penalty amount.

---