2024 (3) TMI 415

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....know as to why the seized gold should not be confiscated and why penalty should not be imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. After due process, the Adjudicating Authority ordered for absolute confiscation of Gold Bars weighing 3033.8 grams valued at Rs. 90,71,062/-. He imposed penalty of Rs. 20 Lakhs on the Appellant under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. Being aggrieved, the Appellant is before the Tribunal. 2. The Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that he had given the details of the owner of the Gold Bars along with his Mobile Number. However, proper investigations have not been taken up to get hold of this person nor has the owner of the gold been made a Noticee in the entire proce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as been taken up by the Department and it was found that the mobile number given by the Appellant did not belong to Ramesh Soni. Inspite of trying their best by the Department to trace this person, he was not traceable. Thus, the Appellant has given a fictitious name and non-existing mobile number so as to get the issue moved away from him to some other person. He has stated that he has picked up one mobile which was left in the bus which is not believable. After giving two proper recorded Statements, he has retracted it at the last stage just to make a point that the Statements recorded by him earlier were given under force. All these show that the Appellant has never cooperated and he was the main person in the entire litigation. Hence, t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... he was not the owner, law requires that in case of any goods of foreign origin, proper documentary evidence should be available with him. Penal provision under Section 112(b) reads as under:- "Who acquires possession of or is in any way concerned in carrying, removing, depositing, harbouring, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner dealing with any goods which he  knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation under section 111," 8. It can be seen from the above Section that mere carrying, keeping or dealing in any other manner with any goods which are liable for confiscation, would entail penalty under Section 112(b). In this particular case, Appellant was carrying 17 gold bars of for....