2025 (6) TMI 1681

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Lakh Thirteen Thousand only) under Section 112(b)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. 1.1. Customs Appeal No. 75473 of 2022 has been filed by Shri Bachchalal against the imposition of penalty of Rs.3,13,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Thirteen Thousand only) under Section 112(b)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. As both these appeals emanate from a common order, the same are taken up together for disposal. 3. The facts of the case are that acting on specific intelligence, the Officers of the Anti-Smuggling Unit of Customs Division, Imphal, intercepted the appellants herein, on 19.04.2019. On thorough search of both the appellants, 06 (six) numbers of gold biscuits bearing foreign marking, weighing 996 gms were recovered. The appellants could not produ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....111(b) and (d) of the Customs Act, 1962. He also imposed penalties of Rs.3,13,000/- each on both the appellants under Section 112(b)(i) ibid. 6.1. The appellants challenged the said order before the Ld. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), C.G.S.T., Central Excise & Customs, Guwahati, who, vide the impugned order, has upheld the above order passed by the ld. adjudicating authority. 6.2. Aggrieved against the imposition of penalties on them, the appellants have filed these appeals. 7. The Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that they were not the beneficiaries of the seized gold; they were induced by an unidentified individual to act as carriers for a small sum of money. It has been stated by the appellants that they had ac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n sum of money. They have stated that due to financial hardship, they had accepted the money and thus had agreed to carry the said gold, as carriers. Accordingly, the appellants have prayed for a lenient view with regard to imposition of penalties. 10.1. I find that the appellants are merely the carriers of the gold in question. They have claimed that they are not the actual beneficiaries of the said gold. I find that the Revenue has not brought in any evidence to counter the said claim made by the appellants that they are not the actual beneficiaries of the gold. I also observe that the ld. adjudicating authority has absolutely confiscated the gold in question and the appellants are not making any claim regarding the gold so confiscated b....