TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 1088
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....180 gm was ordered for absolute confiscation under Section 111(b) and 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. A penalty of Rs.1 lakh was imposed under Section 112(b)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. 3. The proceedings in the instant case trace their origin to a seizure effected from the shop-cum-melting workshop of the appellant located at Shovaram Street, Burrabazar, Kolkata 700007. It is alleged that the Customs Officers recovered and seized primary gold and gold cut-pieces from the said premises on the purported ground that the same were of smuggled origin and acquired in contravention of the Customs Act, 1962 as the appellant failed to provide any licit documentation thereof. 4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the proceedings ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rity has mechanically reproduced allegations without independent analysis. The appellate order merely parrots the findings of the lower authority, reflecting non-application of mind. 8. The Appellant is a goldsmith and operator of a small melting workshop, routinely engaged in transactions involving old jewellery and refining thereof. The gold seized was part of such legitimate stock-in-trade. There is no embargo under the Customs Act preventing possession of marked foreign gold if not proven to be smuggled. 9. Learned Departmental Representative appearing on behalf of the Revenue justified the impugned order and prayed that the appeal filed by the Appellant, being devoid of any merits, may be dismissed. 10. Heard both the sides an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot. Section 123 of Customs Act, 1962, prescribes that the burden of proving that goods which have been seized under the Act are not smuggled in nature is on the person who claims the ownership of the goods. For the sake of ready reference, the said Section is extracted below: - "SECTION 123. Burden of proof in certain cases. - (1) Where any goods to which this section applies are seized under this Act in the reasonable belief that they are smuggled goods, the burden of proving that they are not smuggled goods shall be- (a) in a case where such seizure is made from the possession of any person, - (i) on the person from whose possession the goods were seized; and (ii) if any person, other than the person fr....