Page 194 - ELT_1st June 2020_VOL 372_Part 5th

728 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

the business of silver bullion and leg chains for last ten years. He
further submits that he had purchased 112.430 kgs. of silver bullion
by 8 transactions from SB Ornaments Pvt. Ltd., Agra from May 2012
to March 2013 and 13.199 Kgs. from M/s. Nishant Handicrafts, Ma-
thura and 4.926 Kgs. from M/s. Prashant Silver Handicrafts, Mathu-
ra from December 2012 to January 2013. That out of the stock of sil-
ver bullion he has sent the 60 kgs of remnant particles of silver bul-
lion in 6 polythene bags each of 1-Kgs. through his employee
Rakesh on 24-6-2013 from Mathura to Chennai by train which was
handed over to Green Dart courier, Chennai for sending it to
Mahendran.
23-9-2013 Letters of SB Ornaments confirming sale of silver bullion to the ap-
and 15-10- pellant.
2013
5-11-2013 Confirmation letter of Prashant Silver Handicrafts.
5-11-2013 Further, confirmation letter of Nishant Silver Handicrafts to the ap-
pellant.
20-1-2014 Statement of Gaurav Agarawal, appellant before the Deputy Com-
missioner of Central Excise, Aligarh, wherein the details of transac-
tion and also submits the entire books of account including cash
book, sales tax return, income-tax statement and ledger accounts for
purchase and sale/trade in silver.
13-2-2014 Show cause notice is issued by the department proposing confisca-
tion and penalty.
1-4-2014 Reply to show cause notice filed contesting the proposal for confis-
cation and penalty.
9-9-2015 O-I-O No. 45/2015 (JC) passed by the original authority absolutely
confiscating the silver granules and imposing penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs
on the ground that the burden under Sec. 23 had not been dis-
charged and that the packings of the polythene bags indicate that
the silver might have been of Korea origin and smuggled.
6-11-2015 Appellant deposits 7.5% of the penalty amount and filed appeal to
the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Trichy.
9-12-2015 Appeal filed before the appellate authority.
23-6-2016 The appellate authority namely the Commissioner of Customs (Ap-
peals), Trichy rejects the appeal.
29-9-2016 Appellant deposits balance 2.5% of the penalty amount and prefers
appeal to this Hon’ble Tribunal.
2.1 Contentions :-
(1) The consistent stand of the appellant is that the silver under seizure
are not of foreign origin, which is reflected in his first statement
dated 17-8-2013. Further, on [assessment], the purity of the silver is
shown to be 99.80 and 99.77. Therefore, even on the face of the rec-
ords, there is no material to show that the silver bars/granules un-
der seizure were smuggled so as to warrant absolute confiscation.
(2) The only finding of the original authority as confirmed by the ap-
pellate authority is that the packings had markings “made in Ko-
rea” with lot numbers and appear to be company packed having
high purity and uniform dimension besides shiny finish. The
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st June 2020  194