Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2024 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 415 - CESTAT KOLKATASeizure of Gold Bars - Confiscation - Penalty u/s 112(b) - HELD THAT:- As can be seen from the Section 112(b), that mere carrying, keeping or dealing in any other manner with any goods which are liable for confiscation, would entail penalty u/s 112(b). Appellant was carrying 17 gold bars of foreign origin which is not disputed by either side and was not carrying any documentary evidence. Though as per the factual details, it may be possible to come to a conclusion that the Appellant would not be financially strong to possess the gold bar worth of Rs. 90 lakhs, still even as a person carrying this gold bars without proper documentary evidence, he would be required to be imposed with penalty u/s 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. However considering the fact that the Appellant is a small time gold melting person, I take the view that imposing penalty of Rs. 20 Lakhs on him when the absolutely confiscated gold bars are worth of Rs. 90 Lakhs, is very harsh on him. Only on this ground, I reduce the penalty from Rs. 20 Lakhs to Rs. 2 Lakhs. It is seen from the Appeal Papers that he has already deposited Rs. 1.5 Lakhs while filing the Appeal. After adjusting this amount, the Appellant is required to pay balance Rs. 50,000/- which should be fulfilled by him by 30th June 2024. The absolute confiscation order is not challenged. Hence, I affirm the same - Thus, Appeal stands disposed off thus.
|