TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1052
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Duty Confirmed 1. 34/2023-24 dated 13.12.2023 30625730 dated 06.12.2022 27 Gold Dore Bars (26 bars provisionally released pursuant to Tribunal's decision 207.47 kg of GDB of Rs. 98,44,43.760/- 2. 35/2023-24 dated 14.12.2023 102 past Bills of Entries from Rwanda for imports from Tanzania and Burundi 58 Gold Dore bars Goods of value Rs. 1,84,79,736.26/- 3. 04/2024-25 dated 22.04.2024 59 Bills of Entry (1+58 already covered under remaining both the SCNs) 59 Gold Dore bars Short paid custom duty of Rs. 101,86,28,255/- 2. It is observed that out of the aforementioned 11 appeals, 6 appeals i.e. bearing no. C/51032, 51031, 51187, 51188, 51189 & 51190, all of the year 2025 are with respect to challenging the personal penalty imposed on the Directors of the importing company, M/s Tasha Gold Pvt. Ltd [TGPL] one of the appellant herein. The two appeals therein as bearing no's. C/50914 & 50915/2025 have challenged the order of imposition of personal penalty on the Customs Broker of the said importing company. 3. Remaining three appeals bearing no. C/50760/2025, C/50761/2025 and C/50828/2025 relate to confiscation of gold bars and impositi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation No. 49/2015-20 dated 05.01.2020 of DGFT Directorate General of Foreign Trade amended the import policy on conditions for gold in any form, other than monetary gold and silver in any form under Chapter 71 of Indian Customs Tariff (HS) 2017, the department formed an opinion, the import of all items falling under CTH 71081200, except gold dore bars, is allowed only through nominated agencies as notified by RBI and DGFT and IFSCA. However, so far as import of gold dore bar is concerned, the same is only permitted from refineries that too only against an import license issued with actual user condition. 8. Department further observed that three licenses were issued to M/s TGPL by DGFT. However with the two conditions which implies that Notification No. 50/2017-Cus dated 30.06.2017 is binding for the import of gold dore bars in absence whereof the import can become prohibited. The said notification mandated for Assay Certificate issued by the mining company to have been enclosed with the import consignment. The goods were also to be mandatorily imported in accordance with the packing list issued by the mining company. None of these documents were annexed by the appellant at the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olved in the present appeal about violation of the conditions of Notification No's. 90/2008 and that of 50/2017 has already been decided in favour of the appellant in the case of Yash Oro India Pvt Ltd vs. Principal Commissioner of Customs, ECC Import, New Delhi reported as (2026) 43 CENTAX 104, Tribunal Delhi wherein it has been held that the license condition does not bar the availment of benefit of Notification No. 96/2008. Hence the benefit cannot be denied when the DGFT license has not been cancelled. It is submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the benefits under multiple notifications can be availed provided all the conditions under all the notifications are satisfied. Ld. Counsel further about respective allegation as below: i) 1 gold dore bar was weighing below 5 kg, in violation of condition 40(a) of Notification 50/2017; ii) Learned counsel submitted that 27 bars were imported by the appellant with respect to show cause notice dated 13.12.2023, 26 bars admittedly weighing above 5kgs. One bar being underweight has wrongly been held towards the entire consignment. The violation of the condition has wrongly been alleged; iii) The puri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....customs duty in the name of the said show cause notice is liable to be set aside on this ground itself. In addition, it is submitted that once the demand does not survive the confiscation of the imported goods ordered under section 111(m), 111(a) and 111(q), the redemption fine under section 125, the interest under section 28(AA) and the penalties under section 112(a), 112(b) and 114AA of the Customs Act do not at all survive. The personal penalties on the director as well as the custom broker also cannot sustain. 15. Learned counsel submitted that the department was not allowing even the provisional release of the imported gold dore bars, however the permission was granted by this Tribunal vide order dated 05.12.2023 with respect to 20 GDBs above 5kg. The Revenue appeal before Hon'ble High Court Delhi was dismissed vide order dated 08.02.2024. The provisional assessment of Bills of Entry pursuant to those orders has wrongly been denied finalization. Bank guarantees have wrongly been cancelled. With these submissions the order under challenge is prayed to be set aside and confiscated gold and silver is prayed to be released and the appeal is prayed to be allowed. 16. While re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....applicable here, as M/s Narrondas Manordass did not approach the DGFT to modify the license to allow clearance under Notification No. 96/2008-Cus. 18. The license conditions, including compliance with Notification No. 12/2012-Cus (or Notification No. 50/2017-Cus), are enforceable under Section 11 of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992, and Paragraph 2.04 of the FTP, which empower the DGFT to specify procedures and conditions for imports. 19. The importer's non-compliance with the license conditions rendered the goods liable for confiscation under Sections 111(d) and 111(0) of the Customs Act, 1962. Section 111(d) applies to goods imported contrary to any prohibition or restriction under the Customs Act or other laws, such as the FTP. Section 111(0) applies to goods exempted subject to conditions that are not observed. The appellant's own case judgment of Delhi High Court (para 12) supports this position by affirming that non compliance with the conditions of the specified notification (e.g., weight and purity requirements) justifies action under the Customs Act. In the present case, the importer's failure to adhere to the mandated notification const....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the above issue in light of this fact we have foremost perused the concerned notifications. The relevant portion/entries at serial no. 354 of the said Notification No. 50/2017 reads as follows: Sr. No. Chapter or heading or sub-heading or tariff item Description of goods Standards rate IGST Condition No. 354 71 Gold Dore bar, having gold content not exceeding 95% 9.35% - 9 and 40 Therefore, as per the said Notification, an importer must follow Condition No-09 & 40 as detailed below: Table-6 Condition No. Condition 9. If the importer follows the procedure set out in the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty) Rules, 2017. 40. If,- a) the goods are directly shipped from the country in which they were produced and each bar has a weight of 5 kg. or above; b) the goods are imported in accordance with the packing list issued by the mining company by whom they were produced; c) the importer produces before the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, an assay certificate issued by the mining company or the laboratory attached to it, giv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion and/or an exempting provision in a taxing statute should be construed strictly and it is not open to the court to ignore the conditions prescribed in the relevant policy and the exemption notifications issued in that regard. 24. The exemption notification should be strictly construed and given a meaning according to legislative intendment. The Statutory provisions providing for exemption have to be interpreted in light of the words employed in them and there cannot be any addition or subtraction from the statutory provisions. 25. As per the law laid down by this Court in a catena of decisions, in a taxing statute, it is the plain language of the provision that has to be preferred, where language is plain and is capable of determining a defined meaning. Strict interpretation of the provision is to be accorded to each case on hand. Purposive interpretation can be given only when there is an ambiguity in the statutory provision or it results in absurdity, which is so not found in the present case." 26. The Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs M/s Dilip Kumar and Company reported as (2018) 9 SCC 1, also the five judge bench of hon'ble Supreme Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ny before a court and permits the statements to be used as substantive evidence in a trial. A confession made to a police officer is inadmissible in court. A confession made to a customs officer, if deemed voluntary, is admissible. That distinction-settled by a line of Constitution Bench judgements going back to Ramesh Chandra Mehta v State of West Bengaland Illias v Collector of Customs in the late 1960s-means that a confession recorded by a Customs officer carries full evidentiary weight as substantive evidence, provided it is found to be voluntary. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Paragraph 11 of The Assistant Collector of Customs v Hasanali Rumi (2019), Near Law (Bom. H.C.) online 2880 in Criminal Appeal No. 136/1995 while upholding an acquittal, asked: If courts were to simply accept Section 108 statements as "gospel truth", why would there be a need to hold a trial at all? Court held that: it was reasonable to infer coercion. 29. The issue of Section 108 confessions again returned to the Supreme Court in case of Amad Noormamad Bakali v State of Gujarat, in Criminal Appeal No. 1232-1237 of 2012. Vide judgment dated 23.02.2026 Supreme Court reiterated that confession to Customs ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... we hold that the appellant has wrongly availed the exemption benefit. Once it is clear that conditions of import are not complied with the imported goods become the prohibited goods in terms of section 2(33) of the Customs Act, 1962. The goods are rightly ordered confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act. Since the importer, its directors & its CHA all have attempted to clear such goods. The penalties upon all the appellants have rightly been imposed under Section 112 and 114A of the Act. In light of the above discussion both the issues are decided against the appellants. Issue No. (iii): 32. The appellant has simultaneously availed the benefit of nil duty of Notification No. 96/2008 dated 13.08.2008 which is in respect of import from least developed countries while importing GDB's under import license already mandating compliance of the conditions of another Notification Nos. 50/2017 and Notification No. 96/2008. The countries like Tanzania and Rwanda are specified in the appendix to the notification no. 96/2008. However, for any such notification, the most cogent document is the Certificate of Country of origin issued by the designated authority of the said country....