TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (4) TMI 77
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5 = years continuously. Then, again he was there in 2004 and 2005. In 2005, he brought gold ornaments allegedly purchased from the savings over the years and kept in safe custody. When he arrived at Chennai Airport on 12-07-2005 a Customs Officer intercepted him. He asked him what were the goods that he was carrying. He said that they were personal belongings, TV sets and gold jewellery. He also offered to pay duty if it was found that he was carrying baggage in excess of free baggage allowance or in excess of duty free allowance. The officers seized gold jewellery under a mahazar and also damaged the TV set to see if any gold was concealed in the picture tube. The confessional statement was recorded. He was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13-07-2005 and also detained under COFEPOSA. On 09-01-2006, a show cause notice was issued. The Department proposed to levy penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act. The Commissioner of Customs ordered absolute confiscation of the gold jewellery and a TV set and a penalty of Rs.2,00,000/- was imposed. On appeal, the Tribunal remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, giving the respondent a reasonable opportunity of redeeming th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he officer had considered the mode of concealment and the fact that he was not an eligible passenger and had rightly held that absolute confiscation is warranted. The learned Central Government Standing Counsel referred to the following decisions: Shaik Jamal Basha Vs. Government of India (1997 (91) ELT 277 (AP)) Garg Woollen Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Addl.Collr. of Customs, New Delhi (1998 (104) ELT 306 (SC)) A. Shaud Ali Vs. Additional Collector of Customs, Madurai 2001 (133) ELT 554 (Mad) Nine Star Exports Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Ports) Chennai (2003(151) ELT 265 (Mad)) Gurucharansingh Vs. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence in Crl. Appeal No.576 of 2008 dated 01-04-2008 Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. Srikumar Agencies (2008 - TIOL-220-sc-cx-lb) M.K.S. Mohammed Rafi Vs. Joint Commissioner of Customs in W.P.No.15146 of 2001 dated 03-12-2004 Prince Anthony Sagayam Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Customs in W.A.No.758 and 563 of 2006 dated 25-01-2008 5. Mr. A. Thiagarajan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the goods were only restricted goods. Gold was not a prohibited item. Therefore, the officer was under a m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be considered as a total prohibition and that the expression does not bring within its fold the restrictions imposed by Clause (3) of the Import Control Order, 1955. The Court negatived the said contention and held thus:-- "...What Clause (d) of Section 111 says is that any goods which are imported or attempted to be imported contrary to "Any prohibition imposed by any law for the time being in force in this country" is liable to be confiscated. "Any prohibition" referred to in that section applies to every type of "prohibition". That prohibition may be complete or partial. Any restriction on import or export is to an extent a prohibition. The expression "any prohibition" in Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 includes restrictions. Merely because Section 3 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, uses three different expressions "prohibiting", "restricting" or "otherwise controlling", we cannot cut down the amplitude of the word "any prohibition" in Section 111(d) of the Act. "Any prohibition" means every prohibition. In other words all types of prohibitions. Restriction is one type of prohibition. From item (I) of Schedule I, Part IV to Import Control Order, 1955, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....specified in the said First Schedule, as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate as specified in the corresponding entry in column (3) of the said Table and from the whole of the additional duty leviable thereon under section 3 of the said Customs Tariff Act." (2) The exemption is subject to the following conditions, namely:- the duty shall be paid in convertible foreign currency; the quantity of gold imported in any form shall not exceed ten kilograms per eligible passenger, and the gold is either carried by the eligible passenger at the time of his arrival in India or is imported by him within fifteen days of his arrival in India." "Explanation : For the purpose of this notification, 'eligible passenger' means a passenger of Indian origin or a passenger holding a valid passport, issued under the Passports Act, 1967 (15 of 1967), who is coming to India after a period of not less than six months of stay abroad; and short visits, if any, made by the eligible passenger during the aforesaid period of six months shall be ignored if the total duration of stay on such visits does not exceed thirty days and such passenger has not availed of the exemption under this notific....