2024 (4) TMI 700 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Upholds Penalties for Gold Smuggling Under Customs Act; Dismisses False Implication Claims; Others Cleared.

The Tribunal upheld the penalties on the appellants under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962, based on the recovery of foreign-origin gold and their ... Absolute Confiscation - Imposition of penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Smuggling of Gold - foreign origin Gold - non-recording of statements to corroborate the allegation of smuggling of gold - HELD THAT:- It is observed that nowhere appellants, namely, Shri Rupam Ghosh and Shri Vijay Bhagat, during the course of interrogation or thereafter, have denied their implication in the case. Only at the time of appellate stage, they are claiming that they have been falsely implicated in the case - As gold has been recovered from the possession of Shri Vijay Bhagat and Shri Rupam Ghosh, therefore, they cannot claim that they have been falsely implicated in this case and recovery of the gold was made on the basis of foreign marking, having a reasonable belief that gold is of foreign origin. The gold in question has been rightly confiscated absolutely by the ld. adjudicating authority. As recovery of gold has been made from Shri Vijay Bhagat and Shri Rupam Ghosh, therefore, they cannot be exonerated. Accordingly, the penalty imposed on them of Rs.3,00,000/- each is confirmed. Although the name of Shri Suresh Patil has been given by Shri Rupam Ghosh and Shri Vijay Bhagat during the course of investigation, but no corroborative evidence has been produced by the Revenue apart from the statement of the co-accused to allege that Shri Suresh Patil or Shri Balaji Abaso Patil (appellants herein) were involved in the activity of smuggling of the gold in question - As no evidence has been produced by the Revenue against Shri Suresh Patil and Shri Balaji Abaso Patil, therefore, no penalty can be imposed on the said two appellants. Appeal disposed off. Issues Involved:Challenge against penalty imposition u/s 112 of Customs Act, 1962.Summary:Issue 1: Imposition of Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962The case involved the interception of two individuals riding a motorcycle, where gold bars of foreign origin were recovered. The appellants, Shri Rupam Ghosh and Shri Vijay Bhagat, initially denied involvement but later confessed to carrying smuggled gold. The investigation revealed their connection to Shri Suresh Patil, who was allegedly to receive the gold. The adjudication led to the confiscation of the gold and imposition of penalties on all appellants.Details:- Intelligence gathered by DRI led to the interception of the appellants with gold bars bearing foreign markings.- Confession of the appellants regarding their involvement in carrying the smuggled gold.- Connection established with Shri Suresh Patil, further corroborated by the statement of Shri Balaji Abaso Patil.- Case made for absolute confiscation of gold and penalty imposition u/s 112 of Customs Act, 1962.- Adjudication resulted in the confiscation of gold and imposition of penalties on all appellants.Issue 2: Allegation of False ImplicationThe appellants claimed false implication, stating that they were unaware of the gold and were merely riding the motorcycle when the packet was dropped near them. They argued that no statements from Shri Suresh Patil and Shri Balaji Abaso Patil were recorded to support the smuggling allegations against them.Details:- Appellants argued being falsely implicated, denying involvement in the smuggling.- Lack of recorded statements from Shri Suresh Patil and Shri Balaji Abaso Patil to substantiate the smuggling allegations.- Appellants' denial contradicted by the recovery of gold from their possession, bearing foreign markings and purity.Conclusion:The Tribunal observed that the recovery of gold from the appellants' possession, coupled with their admissions, negated the claim of false implication. Penalties on Shri Rupam Ghosh and Shri Vijay Bhagat were upheld, while no penalties were imposed on Shri Balaji Abaso Patil and Shri Suresh Patil due to lack of corroborative evidence. The appeals were disposed of accordingly, with cross objections also being addressed.