Bholanath Majumder Vs. Commissioner of Customs, - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. the appellant was a lincesed gold dealer as per the provisions of gold (control) act, 1968 at karimganj, assam. his business and residential premises were searched on 10.2.86 and 11.2.86. as a result of the search, a total quantity of 6789.710 gms. of gold and gold articles of 22 carats purity valued at rs. 13,62,442.00 were found to be unaccounted for in his statutory registers and the same were accordingly seized. he was issued a show-cause notice dated 6.8.86 for alleged violation of provisions of the sections 55, 56, 36, 8(1), 32, 38, 27(7)(b) 44(2), 44(7) and 27(8) of the act, 1968. in this notice he was called to show cause why the seized gold should not be confiscated under section 71 of the act and why a penalty should not be imposed on him under section 74.2. on considering the reply of the party and the submission made by him during the course of personal hearing, the collector of customs & central excise, shillong vide his order dated 6.11.86 held that out of the total quantity of gold seized from the noticee, only the gold weighing 5674.670 gms. was not properly accounted for and therefore, was liable to be confiscated under section 71 of the gold (control) act, 1968. accordingly he ordered for its confiscated but however gave an option to him to redeem the same on payment of a fine of rs. 25,000/- under section 73. the commissioner in his order further imposed a penalty of rs. 5000/- on the party under section 74.3. this is an appeal against the above order of the commissioner. the appellant is not present but he has sent a communication dated 17.11.2001 by fax requesting to dispose of his appeal on merits.accordingly i have heard shri a.k. mondal, jdr for the revenue. on going through the written submissions made by the appellant it is observed that he has not advanced any arguments with regard to the merits of his case. he has only extracted certain provisions of the gold (control) act, 1968 without anyway commenting as to how these provisions are relevant or not to his defence. it is observed that the redemption fine of rs. 25,000/- for the confiscation of the gold valued at more than rs. 10 lacs is only a nominal amount and the penalty of rs. 5000/- is also not excessive. on merits, therefore, i find no force in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.

Judgment:
1. The appellant was a lincesed gold dealer as per the provisions of Gold (Control) Act, 1968 at Karimganj, Assam. His business and residential premises were searched on 10.2.86 and 11.2.86. As a result of the search, a total quantity of 6789.710 gms. of gold and gold articles of 22 carats purity valued at Rs. 13,62,442.00 were found to be unaccounted for in his statutory registers and the same were accordingly seized. He was issued a Show-cause Notice dated 6.8.86 for alleged violation of provisions of the Sections 55, 56, 36, 8(1), 32, 38, 27(7)(b) 44(2), 44(7) and 27(8) of the Act, 1968. In this Notice he was called to show cause why the seized gold should not be confiscated under Section 71 of the Act and why a penalty should not be imposed on him under Section 74.

2. On considering the reply of the party and the submission made by him during the course of personal hearing, the Collector of Customs & Central Excise, Shillong vide his order dated 6.11.86 held that out of the total quantity of gold seized from the noticee, only the gold weighing 5674.670 gms. was not properly accounted for and therefore, was liable to be confiscated under Section 71 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968. Accordingly he ordered for its confiscated but however gave an option to him to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 25,000/- under Section 73. The Commissioner in his order further imposed a penalty of Rs. 5000/- on the party under Section 74.

3. This is an appeal against the above order of the Commissioner. The appellant is not present but he has sent a communication dated 17.11.2001 by FAx requesting to dispose of his appeal on merits.

Accordingly I have heard Shri A.K. Mondal, JDR for the Revenue. On going through the written submissions made by the appellant it is observed that he has not advanced any arguments with regard to the merits of his case. He has only extracted certain provisions of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 without anyway commenting as to how these provisions are relevant or not to his defence. It is observed that the redemption fine of Rs. 25,000/- for the confiscation of the gold valued at more than Rs. 10 lacs is only a nominal amount and the penalty of Rs. 5000/- is also not excessive. On merits, therefore, I find no force in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.