Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Gurmeet Singh Vs. Collector of Customs

Gurmeet Singh vs Collector of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jul 10, 1996
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/9733

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Subject
FERA

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

FERA

Key legal issue
FERA

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Gurmeet Singh

Respondent

Collector of Customs

Legal References

Reported In
(1996)(86)ELT642TriDel

Excerpt

.....i observe that the appellants had changed the stand. before the assistant collector, the claim was made that the currency was received as an unsolicited gift. on this observation, no penalty was imposed on the appellant. before the collector (appeals), the plea was made that the money was for defraying the expenses of the sender's family. in either case, the customs were satisfied that it was a case of smuggling. the amount is small. it is also correct that well before the date of receipt of the parcel, the government had adopted a liberalised policy where the people abroad were encouraged to send foreign exchange to a resident in india. in the light of these circumstances, the order of absolute confiscation of the currency is unwarranted and harsh. the customs possess the remedy in the form of redemption fine in dealing with cases of unauthorised importation. this was a case where the lower authority could exercise their authority under section 125 of the customs act, 1962.1 feel that this is a case fit for relief. in modification of the lower order, i direct that the currency may be redeemed on payment of a fine of rs. 2,500/-. the appellants would be required to produce a no objection certificate from the reserve bank of india. the appeal is thus allowed in these terms.

Full Judgment

1. In this case, one Shri Jaswant Singh residing in U.K., sent a letter to the appellant containing also currency amounting to Pounds 250/-. On detection, the currency was seized and confiscated absolutely, under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 for contravention of Section 13(1) of FERA, 1970. The Assistant Collector also observed that the appellants had not produced any permission from the Reserve Bank of India for this importation. The Collector (Appeals) upheld the lower authority's order observing that the currency was concealed in the letter. Against this order, the present appeal is directed.

2. Shri J.K. Wadhawan, Advocate appearing for the appellants, stated that both the sender and receiver of the currency are illiterate persons. The currency was not concealed in any manner. The currency was sent for the family expenses of the receiver. Shri Gurmeet Singh had approached the Reserve Bank of India for permission and the RBI had agreed to consider the request if the Customs authorities gave a No objection certificate. The Customs however, did not give such a certificate but chose to confiscate the currency. The learned Counsel submitted that the Government had adopted a liberal policy for import of foreign exchange and therefore, the order of confiscation was wrong.

Shri Nanak Chand, learned DR maintained that this was an unauthorised import and the order of confiscation was legal.

3. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides.

While I agree that the currency merely in the fold of a letter cannot attract the charge of concealment, I observe that the appellants had changed the stand. Before the Assistant Collector, the claim was made that the currency was received as an unsolicited gift. On this observation, no penalty was imposed on the appellant. Before the Collector (Appeals), the plea was made that the money was for defraying the expenses of the sender's family. In either case, the Customs were satisfied that it was a case of smuggling. The amount is small. It is also correct that well before the date of receipt of the parcel, the Government had adopted a liberalised policy where the people abroad were encouraged to send foreign exchange to a resident in India. In the light of these circumstances, the order of absolute confiscation of the currency is unwarranted and harsh. The Customs possess the remedy in the form of redemption fine in dealing with cases of unauthorised importation. This was a case where the lower authority could exercise their authority under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962.1 feel that this is a case fit for relief. In modification of the lower order, I direct that the currency may be redeemed on payment of a fine of Rs. 2,500/-. The appellants would be required to produce a No objection certificate from the Reserve Bank of India. The appeal is thus allowed in these terms.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial