TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d been held that Section 123 cannot be applied - The claim that the respondents marked the mound of gold with the words "CHI ESSAYEUR FONDEUR" as the mound was part of the imported gold had been rightly accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals) - the documents given in respect of substantial quantity of the seized gold produced by Keerthi Kumar Jain stands accepted by the department - the acceptance of the evidence by the Commissioner (Appeals) in respect of the balance quantity of gold calls for no interference – Decided against revenue - Customs Appeal Nos.570/2009, 817 & 818/2010 - FINAL ORDER NO.431-433/2012 - Dated:- 1-6-2012 - M. Veeraiyan, J. Appellant Rep by: Mr. M.M. Ravi Rajendran, Deputy Commissioner (AR) Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yees Shri Ganta Ramachandra Rao and Shri Vegi Ramamohana Rao to be delivered to four buyers who were jewelers in Mandapeta. (c) The employees were not carrying any documents with them at the time of interception by the police. (d) On the basis of investigation, the department has released 44 bars of gold. However, not satisfied with the documents produced in respect of mound of gold and small piece of gold, show-cause notice was issued proposing confiscation of 499.500 grams of gold and proposing imposition of penalties. (e) Original authority absolutely confiscated the gold and imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on Shri Keerthi Kumar Jain and Rs. 5000/- each on S/Shri Ganta Ramachandra Rao and Vegi Ramamohana Rao. (f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not seized by the customs from the respondents but seized by the police authorities and handed over to the customs authorities. Therefore, the burden of proof under Section 123 cannot be thrust on the respondents as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of CCE Vs. D.K. Singh [2006 (199) E.L.T. 202 (M.P.)]. d) They have produced documents relating to procurement of gold bars of purity 995 and the seized gold mound was also of 995 purity and the markings CHI ESSAYEUR FONDEUR was inscribed by the respondent to indicate the imported nature of the part of the gold which was being sent. e) The smaller pieces were remnants of other gold and they were not carrying any marks. 6.1. I have carefully considered the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ospective dealers like Jindath Jewellers, M/s. Sri Kanya Jewellers, M/s. Ganesh Jewellers and M/s. Vasavi Jewellers of Mandapeta. 6.2. Commissioner (Appeals) has given the benefit of doubt to the respondents with the following findings: "In other words, it is clearly probable that the gold was imported (rendering the certification of the assayer true) and it was also clearly probable that the mound and the small piece were remnant of the imported bar of gold on which the markings were inscribed by the appellants to make it marketable (rendering the defence of the appellant true, inasmuch as, neither the impossibility of the contention was established nor the trade practice claimed to have been prevalent and practiced by the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
