TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was wearing these gold chains and bangles concealed under the burka which she was wearing. In her statement, she has confessed that she was not aware that she was supposed to declare the gold and the ornaments. The original authority has discussed in detail the facts of the case and has arrived at a finding that the appellant has indulged in smuggling and has confiscated the unfinished gold, totally weighing 583.18 grams seized from the possession of the appellant under 111(d), 111(i), 111(l) and 111(m) of the Act and also imposed penalty of ₹ 4,50,000/- on the appellant under Section 112(a) of the Act for her omission and acts rendering the goods liable for confiscation under Section 111 of the Act and also imposed penalty of &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m Dubai (Air India Express flight No.IX814) on 03/02/2016 was found to be in possession of two small chains, one big chain and two bangles, all secreted in her person inside clothes worn by the appellant. All the impugned goods were yellow metal in colour and in crude form. They were confirmed as Gold of 24 carat totally weighing 583.180 grams and totally valued at ₹ 15,74,586/- (at the market rate). The said Gold was undeclared and was attempted to be smuggled into India by the appellant for her unjust and illicit gain. The impugned Gold was seized under Section 110 of Customs Act, 1962 (the Act, for short) after being approved by approved Gold appraiser / valuer, under a report dated 03/02/2016 read with statement of the appellant a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... objections is that the appeal is not maintainable under Section 129(A) of the Act because the confiscated goods have been recovered from the baggage of passenger. It is further the contention of the respondent that the remedy available to the appellant is not under Section 129(A)(1) but under Section 129DD by way of revision. He further submitted that this objection of the Revenue is not sustainable in law in view of the fact recorded by the original authority that the appellant was not in possession of no checked-in baggage but was found to be carrying a brown coloured hand bag and one duty free polythene cover as accompanied baggage. Further on examination of said baggage, it was found to contain nothing objectionable but only personal ef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in crude unfinished form 115.730 grams; and (c) one number of big chain shaped gold object in crude unfinished form 349.920 grams. He further submitted that she tried to pass through the Green Channel and on her personal search, it was detected and the same was valued at ₹ 15,74,586/-. He further submitted that the appellant did not produce any documents evidencing the purchase of the aforesaid gold ornaments of the shape of crude chains and bangle in unfinished form recovered from her possession. He further submitted that in her statement made under Section 108 of the Act, she admitted that the gold objects purchased by her did not have any sign or mark. She also admitted that she did not possess any document justifying the purc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al at Mangalore Airport. On suspicion, she was searched and then it was found that she was wearing these gold chains and bangles concealed under the burka which she was wearing. In her statement, she has confessed that she was not aware that she was supposed to declare the gold and the ornaments. Further I find that the original authority has discussed in detail the facts of the case and has arrived at a finding that the appellant has indulged in smuggling and has confiscated the unfinished gold, totally weighing 583.18 grams seized from the possession of the appellant under 111(d), 111(i), 111(l) and 111(m) of the Act and also imposed penalty of ₹ 4,50,000/- on the appellant under Section 112(a) of the Act for her omission and acts r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 112 and Section 114AA of the Act for his illicit act of omission and commission. The defense made by the appellant is an afterthought and untrue. 12. I find that in view of overall circumstances of the case and considering the nature of concealment, purity of gold, status/antecedent of appellant, mode of carriage etc., her culpable statement admitting the guilt. The intent to smuggle gold to defraud the exchequer from its legitimate claim is clearly established and appellant is liable for the penal consequences along with absolute confiscation of gold for alleged contravention of Customs Act, 1962, Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. The defense put forth by appellant now is an afterthought without any basis. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
