Absolute confiscation of gold upheld as reasonable belief of smuggling established

Commissioner of Customs Preventive Kolkata Vs Anil Kumar Soni (Calcutta High Court)

Calcutta High Court held that reasonable belief of smuggling based on clandestine conduct and scientific purity of metal is justifiable. Accordingly, absolute confiscation of gold upheld as reasonable belief for seizure u/s. 123 duly established.

Facts- On May 25, 2018, acting on specific and credible intelligence, Customs officers intercepted Shri Anil Kumar Gaur (Respondent No. 2), at Howrah Railway Station. A search of his person led to the recovery of two gold bars, weighing 1,999.90 grams, who was transporting the same surreptitiously by hiding it within a specially stitched cotton waist belt, worn beneath his garments. The contention of Revenue that this unconventional clandestine way to carry the gold constitutes the primary “fact in issue”, was erroneously brushed aside by Tribunal merely on the ground of technicality.

These two appeals, preferred by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Kolkata, u/s. 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, challenge a common Final Order of the CESTAT, Eastern Zonal Bench, dated November 22, 2024. The litigation originates from a singular investigative operation resulting in the interception of 1,999.90 grams of gold bullion and its subsequent absolute confiscation by the Adjudicating Authority.

Conclusion- Held that “Reasonable Belief” is a behavioural and material construct, not a geographical one. The “Town Seizure” doctrine cannot serve as a legal sanctuary for the illicit transport of high-purity bullion. Once the modus operandi—clandestine concealment—is established, the jurisdictional trigger of Section 123 is complete.