Page 278 - ELT_1st September 2020_Vol 373_Part 5

716 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

2020 (373) E.L.T. 716 (Tri. - All.)
IN THE CESTAT, REGIONAL BENCH, ALLAHABAD
[COURT NO. I]
Shri Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (T)
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREV.), LUCKNOW
Versus
RAJESH KUMAR SETH
Final Order Nos. A/70238-70239/2020-SM(BR) and Misc. Order No.
SO/70089/2020, dated 26-2-2020 in Application No. C/Stay/70158/2019 in Appeal
Nos. C/70231 & 70583/2019
Gold smuggling - Evidence - Redemption fine and penalty - Allega-
tions that foreign marked gold recovered from appellant has been brought
from Nepal, have not been substantiated by Revenue with cogent evidence
warrantying absolute confiscation - However, since appellant has also not
been able to establish as to how he got possession of said gold, imposition of
Redemption Fine and penalty sustainable but reduced - Sections 112 and 125
of Customs Act, 1962. [paras 6, 7]
Revenue’s appeal dismissed/Assessee’s appeal partly allowed
CASE CITED
State of Maharashtra v. Prithviraj Pokhraj Jain — 2000 (126) E.L.T. 180 (Bom.)
— Referred ......................................................................................................................................... [Para 5]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Authorised Representative, for
the Department.
S/Shri S.A. Khan, Consultant and Vineet Kr. Singh,
Advocate for the Assessee.
[Order]. - Above stated two appeals are arising out of common im-
pugned Order-in-Appeal. Therefore, they are taken together for decision. Cus-
toms Appeal No. 70231 of 2019 is filed by Revenue and the other is filed by Shri
Rajesh Kumar Seth.
2. Heard Learned A.R. on behalf of Revenue on miscellaneous applica-
tion. The miscellaneous application is for staying of the operation of impugned
Order-in-Appeal. With the consent of both the sides main appeals were also tak-
en for decision.
3. Heard Learned A.R. Shri Rajeev Ranjan on behalf of the Revenue.
Heard Shri S.K. Khan Learned Consultant along with Shri Vineet Kumar Singh,
Learned Advocate on behalf of Shri Rajesh Kumar Seth and perused the record.
4. The contention of Revenue is that 1 Kg gold of 995 purity was seized
from Shri Rajesh Kumar Seth in Varanasi and it was alleged that the same was
having marking as ‘Valcambi Suisse’ and therefore it was alleged that the said
gold was of third country origin and was brought into India by Shri Rajesh Ku-
mar Seth from Nepal and thus Shri Rajesh Kumar Seth appeared to have violated
the provisions of Notification No. 9/96-Cus. issued under Section 11 of Customs
Act, 1962 and therefore, the said 1 Kg. gold was liable for absolute confiscation.

EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st September 2020  278