2019 (5) TMI 984

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion of the seized rough diamonds weighing 10,510.60 carats valued at Rs. 1,05,58,474/under the provisions of sections 111(d), 111(l) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and imposed penalty of Rs. 45 lakhs upon Shri Pravinkumar R. Ajudiya under section 112(b) of the Act. 3. By the impugned order dated 2.7.2018, the Tribunal has allowed the appeal with consequential relief. 4. Mr. Dhaval Vyas, learned senior standing counsel for the applicant, submitted that this is a case where the impugned order passed by the Tribunal deserves to be stayed without release of goods on any condition. It was submitted that the respondent has failed to show licit possession of the rough diamonds and that diamonds are ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to submit that in case of rough diamonds without KPC, the normal practice is to direct absolute confiscation. It was submitted that if the seized goods are ordered to be released, they will not be available for absolute confiscation in case the applicant ultimately succeeds in the appeal. It was submitted that under section 125 of the Customs Act, the authority has the discretion to absolutely confiscate the goods and that the question as to whether such power has been properly exercised is under consideration in the appeal. It was, accordingly, urged that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal be stayed in entirety. 5. Opposing the application, Mr. Paresh Dave, learned advocate for the respondent, submitted that the seized goods, name....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the second matter, it was the assessee who was in appeal and therefore, he was required to deposit a higher amount of 10% of the value of goods whereas in the first case, it was the revenue which was in appeal and hence, the assessee was required to deposit 6% of the value of goods by way of redemption fine. It was submitted that in line of the above orders, the seized diamonds be released in favour of the respondent upon payment of appropriate redemption fine and penalty and furnishing bank guarantee of proportionate amount. 6. In this case, while the adjudicating authority has ordered absolute confiscation of the rough diamonds, the Tribunal has held in favour of the respondent and has allowed the appeal of the respondent against the or....