2025-VIL-1076-CESTAT-KOL-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs – Sections 111(b) and 112(b)(i) of Customs Act, 1962 – Confiscation of gold bars – Imposition of penalty – Railway Police intercepted employee of Appellant at Railway Station and recovered 6 pieces of gold bars from him – Anti-Smuggling Unit seized said gold bars under belief that same had been smuggled into India by illegal means without payment of appropriate duties of Customs – Additional Commissioner ordered for absolute confiscation of gold bars under Section 111(b) of the Act and imposed a penalty on Appellant under Section 112(b)(i) of the Act – Commissioner (Appeals) upheld Order-in-Original passed by Adjudicating authority – Whether confiscation of gold bars in question is sustainable or not – HELD – Department must establish foreign origin of gold with corroborative evidence. It is an admitted fact that gold was not having any foreign markings engraved, but there were some diamond markings available on said gold. Diamond markings on gold bars alone is not sufficient to arrive at conclusion that said gold bars are of foreign origin. Gold is having 99.5% purity, which would not automatically make the gold as foreign origin gold. Department has not brought in any evidence to establish foreign origin or smuggled nature of gold – Appellant has claimed to have purchased gold in question by legal means. In support of this claim, Appellant have produced documentary evidence. Documentary evidence submitted by Appellant establishes domestic purchase of gold and hence, gold bars in question are not liable for confiscation. Confiscation of gold bars in question is not sustainable and hence, set aside – Penalty imposed on Appellant under Section 112(b)(i) of the Act is also set aside – Appeal disposed of

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page