TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the foreign currency and Indian currency recovered from the vehicles were liable to confiscation as sale proceeds of smuggled gold, and whether confiscation could be sustained under the Customs Act; (ii) whether confiscation of the Contessa car and the scooter was sustainable; (iii) whether the penalties imposed on the appellants called for reduction.
Issue (i): Whether the foreign currency and Indian currency recovered from the vehicles were liable to confiscation as sale proceeds of smuggled gold, and whether confiscation could be sustained under the Customs Act.
Analysis: The admissions in the statements, the recoveries from the vehicles, and the inter-linked versions of the persons concerned were treated as corroborative of one another. The retractions were held to be belated and unsupported by any satisfactory explanation. On that footing, the currencies were treated as the sale proceeds of smuggled gold and were held liable to confiscation under Section 121 of the Customs Act, 1962. At the same time, in the absence of an allegation of smuggling of foreign exchange into India, confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 was not warranted. The foreign exchange provisions in Section 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 were noted, but the absence of extension of that provision to the Customs Act did not affect the conclusion on Section 121.
Conclusion: Confiscation of the foreign currency and Indian currency was upheld under Section 121 of the Customs Act, 1962, while confiscation under Section 111(d) was not sustained.
Issue (ii): Whether confiscation of the Contessa car and the scooter was sustainable.
Analysis: Confiscation of a conveyance under Section 115 of the Customs Act, 1962 was held to depend on use of the vehicle for transporting imported contraband. Since the case did not involve a finding that the foreign currency was smuggled into India as contraband, the basis for confiscating the vehicles was not made out.
Conclusion: Confiscation of the Contessa car and the scooter was set aside.
Issue (iii): Whether the penalties imposed on the appellants called for reduction.
Analysis: In view of the overall facts and the conclusions on confiscation, the penalties were considered excessive and were reduced.
Conclusion: The penalty on the first appellant was reduced to Rs. 2.5 lakhs and the penalty on the second appellant was reduced to Rs. 50,000.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed only to the extent of setting aside confiscation of the vehicles and reducing the penalties, while confiscation of the currencies as sale proceeds of smuggled gold was maintained.
Ratio Decidendi: Currency proved to be the sale proceeds of smuggled goods is liable to confiscation under Section 121 of the Customs Act, 1962, but confiscation of a conveyance requires a legally established nexus with transport of imported contraband.
TaxTMI 
