TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1757
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e disclosures made, the delay of 172 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The application shall stand disposed of. CUSAA 66/2024 1. This appeal is directed against the order of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ["CESTAT"] dated 24 July 2023. We note that upon taking into consideration the facts which had been gathered in the course of inquiry, the CESTAT has ultimately held as follows:- "9. In order to consider the two issues, it would be appropriate to recall in gist, the impugned order. We note that the Commissioner Appeals has observed that despite various confessional statements of the Appellant, substantial quantity of gold, gold coins and jewellery had been released to him during the investigation it....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... huge quantity of gold coins in shops as well as residential premises of the Appellant. There was no intelligence of conversion of such smuggled gold into jewellery. Therefore he released the jewellery, which had been confiscated. With reference to the gold coins confiscated by the adjudicating authority, the Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that 1236.91 gms of 22ct purity coins carry images of various Indian Banks, Indian jewellers, and companies such as Reliance etc. The gold coins that do not bear foreign markings cannot be suspected to be of smuggled nature. Some coins carry BIS Hallmark stamp which negates their foreign origin. However,2807.29 gms of gold coins of 22carat purity bore the images of King Edward, Elizabeth and images s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of Vinod Solanki vs Union of India which held that there can be conviction only if there is an independent corroboration of the retracted statement. (ii) Ajit Singh vs Addl Commissioner of Customs [2016(332) ELT 01(Del)] of Delhi High Court wherein the Court held that if the statement made by an accused under section 108 of the Customs Act has been retracted later, then it must be corroborated by other evidences and materials on record. (iii) PunidhapuLokeswara Rao vs Commissioner of Cus(Prev), Calcutta [2003 (161) ELT 1016 (Tri-Kolkata) which was subsequently upheld by the Calcutta High Court. The Tribunal had observed "it is well settled proposition of law that confessional statements need independent corroboration" ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hharth Shankar Roy v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai [2013 (291) E.L.T. 244 (Tri.-Mumbai)], Learned Authorised Representative contends that retraction of statement is not in conformity with the test prescribed therein and must be rejected. The circumstances in which the statement of the appellant therein were accorded special importance is no template for the present dispute. It's also the contention of the Learned Authorised Representative that substantive difference between Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 and Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 has been commented upon in Associated Cement Companies Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs [2001 (128) E.L.T. 21 (S.C.)] to support the contention that, for demand of duty under Section 28, the....