9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 891X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 27/08/2018 passed by Commissioner of Customs, GST & Central Excise (Appeals), Lucknow. Appeal Nos. C/71388 & 71389/2018 were filed by revenue with stay applications. The remaining three appeals have been filed by individuals on whom personal penalties were imposed. Further, impugned gold was allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine. 2. Brief facts of the case as recorded by learned Commissioner (Appeals) are that the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Varanasi recovered 2050gm foreign origin gold and foreign origin currency of 17620 Thai Baht from appellant Shri Rajesh Jhamatmal Bhat. Similarly, 2000gm foreign origin gold was recovered from appellant Shri Rajesh Chetandas Vaswani. On the basis of information given by abo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confiscation of gold. Therefore, learned Commissioner (Appeals) through the impugned order gave option to redeem the confiscated gold on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 25 lakhs to appellant Shri Rajesh Chetandas Vaswani and Shri Rajesh Jhamatmal Bhat. He further ordered payment of applicable duty on the said gold. However, he did not interfere with the penalties imposed on Shri Rajesh Jhamatmal Bhat, Shri Rajesh Chetandas Vaswani and Shri Murli Asandas Chandiramani to the tune of Rs. 10 lakhs each under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved by the said order, above stated appellants are before this Tribunal. 3. Revenue is also in appeal before this Tribunal, challenging the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) which allowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edemption fine of around Rs. 25 lakhs was too high. Further, he has contended that there was no finding for imposition of penalty on the above stated three appellants. He has further relied on Final Order No.72932-72934/2018 dated 27.12.2018 passed by this Tribunal in respect of Shri Sanjeeb Kumar @ Pappu Kumar, Shri Ajay Kumar & Shri Umesh Kumar Vs Joint Commissioner, Customs, Lucknow wherein it was held that margin of profit in the trade of gold is very less. He has prayed to wave the penalty on Shri Murli Asandas Chandiramani and prayed to reduce redemption fine and penalty on Shri Rajesh Chetandas Vaswani & Shri Rajesh Jhamatmal Bhat. 7. In their written submissions Revenue has submitted that Shri Rajesh Chetandas Vaswani & Shri Rajesh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon by revenue are applicable in the present case. I, therefore, dismiss both the appeals filed by revenue. Both the stay applications filed by revenue are also dismissed as infructuous. 9. In so far as the appeals filed by the individual appellants are concern, I find that the individual appellants are not in a position to explain how they procured such quantity of gold. Further, they do not have any document to establish licit acquisition of the same. I, therefore, do not interfere with the order of confiscation of impugned gold and imposition of penalty. However, I find that this Tribunal in the above stated case of Shri Sanjeeb Kumar @ Pappu Kumar and others have held that margin of profit in trade of gold is very less. Taking the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
