2025-VIL-958-CESTAT-KOL-CU
  1. Home
  2. 2025-VIL-958-CESTAT-KOL-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs – Section 111(b) of Customs Act, 1962 – Seizure of gold bars – Absolute confiscation – Sustainability – Officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) intercepted Appellant and recovered gold bars and currencies from him – On completion of enquiry, department issued show cause notice to Appellant for absolute confiscation of seized gold along with currencies – Adjudicating authority ordered for absolute confiscation of gold in question under Section 111(b) of the Act along with currencies and vehicle in question – Whether absolute confiscation of gold in question is sustainable – HELD – It is an admitted fact that Appellant was engaged in sale and purchase of jewellery – Allegation of Revenue is that Appellant has brought gold from Myanmar, which is a smuggled one – It is a fact on record that gold has been seized in town and not at any international border/port and there is no foreign marking on gold in question – Appellant has produced evidence of procurement of gold in question by way of an Affidavit executed by mother of Appellant – Appellant has explained the source of procurement of gold in question, which has been inherited from Appellant’s mother, who in turn has given said gold to Appellant after converting her jewellery into gold – Confiscation of gold under presumption of Customs Officer that same was smuggled one, was set aside – Appeal allowed - Confiscation of currencies – Whether currencies seized during course of investigation are liable for confiscation – HELD – Foreign currency recovered from possession of Appellant has been seized on allegation that same was smuggled into India – For said foreign currency, Appellant has explained the source of procurement – Mere possession of foreign currency cannot lead the Department to allege that said foreign currency was smuggled into India by Appellant – Foreign currency seized during course of investigation is not liable for confiscation – Indian currency recovered during course of investigation has not been proved by Revenue to be sale proceeds of smuggled goods – Consequently, Indian currency recovered during course of investigation is also not liable for confiscation – Moreover, vehicle seized during course of investigation is also not liable for confiscation, as same was not involved in any activity of smuggling by Appellant – Impugned order passed by Adjudicating authority set aside.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Biweekly Tax Recap

By Dr. G. Gokul Kishore

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GSTAT Rules & Industry Preparedness
By Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?