TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (6) TMI 90
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of proving licit possession of one bar of silver weighing 30.449 kgs. lies on the present appellants under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 or not ? If not, then whether the confiscation thereof and levy of penalty on the ground that no duty paying document particulars relating to the said metal were produced by the appellants is justified in law ? 2. Heard Shri R. Masillamoney, ld. Consultan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-6-1990. In order to prevent the undue harassment to law abiding persons possessing small quantities of silver bullion of Indian origin, normally the provisions of Section 123 should not be invoked against persons who are found to be in possession of silver bullion of less than 100 kgs. The exception however was not made available if the bullion had been in the form of 30 kgs. bars and also where ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore, this is not the case where silver was held as either utensils or in any small piece and hence burden of proof is to be discharged by the present appellant under Section 123 of the Act. 5. I have carefully considered these rival submissions and records of the case. It is now well laid down law that the directions in the form Circulars issued by Board are binding on all lower authorities. A ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r which the seizure was effected clearly shows that seizure was effected by an Officer lower than the rank of the Asstt. Collector even though the ingot bore no foreign markings' as per the Mahazar itself, and the quantity of the said silver was less than 100 kgs. To that extent, I find that firstly the seizure itself is in violation of the Executive's instructions noted above issued by the Board ....