Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2019 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 986 - HC - CustomsMaintainability of application before Settlement Commission - Jurisdiction - third proviso to Section 127B [read with Section 123(2)] of the Customs Act - gold was detected and seized from her person - burden to prove smuggled gold - Held that:- The decision in Ram Niwas Verma [2015 (9) TMI 197 - DELHI HIGH COURT] has analysed various judgments including the previous judgment in Ashok Kumar Jain [2013 (8) TMI 317 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. The Court held that by virtue of Section 123(2), jurisdiction of the Commission is barred on account of the third proviso to Section 127B(1), in cases involving or concerning smuggling of gold or watches. The plain reading of Ashok Kumar Jain [2013 (8) TMI 317 - DELHI HIGH COURT] that was relied upon by the respondent assessee, shows that the Court had not considered the impact of Section 123(2) upon the jurisdiction of the Settlement Commission in the light of the third proviso to Section 127B. A conjoint reading of these two provisions clearly bears out that the jurisdiction of the Commission to settle cases involving goods referred to in Section 123(2) is excluded. This court is of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained which is hereby set aside - The matter is remitted to the concerned Adjudicating Officer, who shall proceed further and issue notice in the proceedings to be held thereunder.
|