TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1987 (12) TMI 187
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d therefore they seized gold ornaments - equivalent to the weight of the excess noticed. 2. It appears assay Panchanama was carried out on 7-1-78. The seizure was on 1-11-77. During that Panchanama the total weight of seized gold found to be 1405 gms. instead of 1505.05 gms. said to be seized in the panchanama, dated 1-11-77. It appears thereafter the entire stock of the gold was weighed and it was found that 105.05 gms. was excess. 3. During the course of investigation the statement of G.G. Parmar, Partner of the gold dealer was recorded. He inter alia stated that in his absence some gold ornaments must have been received for repairs and polishing hence there was an excess of 930.550 gms. of old gold ornaments. As regards excess of old g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not passed? It is this proceeding which was pending before the Government of India that stood - statutorily transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as appeal. 7. Shri. Prabhu appearing for the Collector supported the order of the adjudicating authority and contended that the defence of the gold dealer that in G.S. 12 only net weight is entered cannot be believed. G.S. 12 provided for entering both gross and net weight. What was entered in G.S. 12 was gross weight and therefore the Deputy Collector was justified in rejecting the defence. Shri. Parmar further submitted that in respect of the old gold ornaments the defence was that they were given by customers to the servant during the absence of the dealer. Shri. Prabhu submitted that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the Collector (Appeals) had found that the seizure itself was bad-in-law. The Collector (Appeals) had observed in his order: "Wnat has been seized is just equivalent to quantity and not unaccounted goods. At the time of examination of goods during personal hearing, seized goods could not at all be tallied with the things weighed and checked. There is no re-examination to contradict this. It only proves further in slip shod way of making seizure panchanama" 10. In his order, the Deputy Collector had referred to the statement of the gold dealer. He had stated among other things that at the time of seizure he requested the officer to seize the old ornaments but then they have seized the new gold ornaments. The Dy. Collector did not advert h....