Deep Rastogi Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)
The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in Delhi has dismissed an appeal filed by Deep Rastogi and others, ruling that it lacks the jurisdiction to hear cases involving gold smuggling through passenger baggage. The appellants had challenged an order that imposed penalties under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, following an investigation into a gold smuggling incident.
The case originated on June 17, 2018, when Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) officers intercepted an individual, Shri Prashant Pandey, at approximately 4:30 AM after he had crossed the green channel at an airport. Pandey was found to be in possession of 667 grams of gold in his baggage. Following an investigation, a show cause notice was issued, leading to penalties being imposed on the appellants by the adjudicating authority. This decision was subsequently affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
Before CESTAT, the learned Authorized Representative (AR) for the Customs department raised a preliminary objection, arguing that appeals against orders involving baggage cases are not maintainable before the Tribunal under the proviso to Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants’ counsel disputed this objection.
After hearing both parties, CESTAT concluded that since the primary accused was intercepted with gold in his baggage after clearing the green channel, the appeals did not fall within its jurisdiction as per Section 129A. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as non-maintainable, granting the appellants the liberty to approach the appropriate forum for a remedy.
