2016 (10) TMI 17

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Mitra AC (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that Appeal of the Revenue was earlier allowed against Sh. Ashoke Kumar Agarwal under order order No. A-148-149/KOL/2002 dt 11/2/2002 passed by this bench. That appellant herein approached Calcutta High Court through WP No. 515 of 2002 and Hon'ble High Court by order dated 22/2/2016 remanded the matter to Tribunal by making following observations:- "Mr. Bharadwaj, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Customs Authority could not dispute the submissions made by Mr. Chakraborti regarding requirement of law for description of mark to be given as appearing on the item sold. He also could not demonstrate from the record at which point or till which of the several sales of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rom what were found on seized gold bars. That when the ultimate source shows markings different than what were found with the respondent then such foreign marked gold becomes smuggled and was liable to confiscation. That first appellate authority has wrongly decided the case in favour of the Respondent. 3. Sh. Arijit Chakraborty (Advocate) & Sh. Sagar Bandopadhyay (Advocate) appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Sh. Arijit Chakraborty argued that it is not a statutory requirement to indicate markings of the foreign origin gold in the sale documents. That even the documents prepared by M/s MMTC also do not indicate the markings of gold bars of foreign origin. Learned Advocate made the bench go through Para- 10 & 11 of the OIA dt 10/8/2001....