Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2011 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (7) TMI 73 - GUJARAT HIGH COURTConfiscation - Penalty - appellant had filed three affidavits of his family members and that of his own to state that the gold belonged to his wife and two daughter-in-laws - the proper officer had confirmed a reasonable belief of the gold bars being the smuggled gold ornaments and, therefore, they were seized under the Customs Act - if the provisions of Section 110 are satisfied where the proper officer would have a reason to believe that goods are liable to confiscation and is satisfied that the goods seized can be presumed to be smuggled goods and he seizes the goods, then the burden of proving otherwise would be on the person from whom the same were seized - hus, both the authorities below have based their opinions and findings on all these facts cumulatively to arrive at a conclusion that the gold seized was the smuggled goods liable to be confiscated for having been smuggled in contravention of the provisions of the Customs Act and those who purchased the gold, including the present appellant, did so with an intention to make profit knowing fully well that the same were smuggled - the amount of penalty in the instant case is very less and the additional reason why this calls for no interference is also a meager amount of penalty and the same would not require any interference in the wake of the seizure of the gold bars - Appeal is dismissed
|