The Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), quashed penalty under Sections 112(a) and (b) and 114 AA of the Customs Act, 1962 as the seized gold bars was established to be domestically purchased.
The officers of DRI Patna along with officers of Gaya Customs intercepted two passengers namely Rajesh Kumar Yadav and Umanath travelling by train. On examination of the said two passengers and their subsequent verification resulted in seizure of gold bars/pieces.
The appellants stated that the gold pieces/bars were seized on the reasonable belief that they were smuggled into India from Bangladesh. The appellants stated that to form a ‘reasonable belief’ that the goods are smuggled from Bangladesh, there must be irrefutable evidence to prove that allegation. In the present case there is no such evidence available to prove that the goods were of foreign origin and smuggled into India from Bangladesh.
Section 112 (a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962 penalty is imposable when the person is found to be dealing with goods for which prohibition is in force or the goods are liable for confiscation. Section 114 AA of the Customs Act, 1962 deals with penalty for use of false and incorrect material
The Two-Member Bench of the Tribunal comprising PK Choudhary, Judicial Member and K Anpazhakan, Technical Member observed that the ‘reasonable belief’ on which the DRI officers presumed that the gold bars/pieces were of smuggled nature is not supported by any corroborative evidence and there is no document available on record to establish that gold bars/pieces were smuggled into India from Bangladesh.
“We find merit in the argument of the appellants that penalty is not imposable on them under section 112(a)and(b) of Customs Act, 1962. The investigation has not brought in any evidence to establish that Manoj Kumar Seth has intentionally made false statement or declaration warranting penalty under section 114AA of Customs Act, 1962. Hence, we hold that penalties under sections 112(a) and (b) and 114 AA of the Customs Act, 1962 are not imposable in this case.” the Bench concluded.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
