Confiscation of gold unsustainable as ownership and acquisition of gold proved via documentary evidence

Anshul Jain Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Allahabad)

CESTAT Allahabad held that legal ownership and acquisition of gold proved via documentary evidence on the other hand, the Department has not been able to provide any iota of evidence to show that the seized gold bar was smuggled. Thus confiscation under Section 121 Customs Act is unsustainable

Facts- DRI received specific intelligence that M/s Mahalaxmi Jewel Exports (Proprietor Shri Prem Sagar Arora) is misusing the EOU Scheme by misdeclaring export jewellery in terms of purity of the gold, and diverting the duty free imported gold into domestic market for sale. Shri Prem Sagar Arora was also Partner of another firm M/s Mine O Gold engaged in trading of gold, jewellery and export of gold jewellery.

Search was conducted at the residential and factory premises of Shri Prem Sagar Arora, and more than 25kgs gold and jewellery items and cash amounting to Rs.20,00,000/- were found. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice was issued proposing confiscation of seized gold u/s. 111, currency u/s. 121 as sale proceeds of smuggled gold and penalty u/s. 112(b) on M/s Mahalaxmi Jewel Exports, Shri Prem Sagar Arora, M/s Mine O Gold and the Appellant.

The impugned order confirmed all the allegations of the Show Cause Notice against all Noticees, hence the present appeal is filed before the Tribunal.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.