The Hyderabad Bench of Customs, excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stayed the order quashing confiscation of smuggled gold citing irreparable loss to customs department.
The bench of A.K. Jyotishi (Technical Member) and Angad Prasad (Judicial Member) have observed that the gold in question has already been sent to the Mint for further process as per extant procedure and it is not presently with the department. Moreover, the fact that if the order is not stayed, then effectively the very purpose of filing of appeals by the department will be lost as when the appeals are decided and in case it is in their favour, the gold itself will no longer be available.
The Appellants/Department has filed the appeals against OIAon various grounds and had also filed stay applications along with the said appeals. In their grounds for seeking stay of the impugned OIA.
The department submitted that they have a very strong case as the evidence is clearly establishing that the impugned gold, which was absolutely confiscated, was smuggled in nature and therefore, liable for absolute confiscation.
The department submitted that the OIA, by which the Original Order of the Adjudicating Authority confiscating the smuggled gold absolutely has been set aside, is not correct.
The department informed that the absolutely confiscated gold i.e., 1860.500 gms valued at Rs.1,07,16,480/- with inscription “MMTC 100 g Gold 999.0” has already been given to the concerned agency for disposal.
As per the Department, the gold of 1860.500 gms was handed over to Security Printing & Minting Corporation of India Ltd. The sales proceeds are yet to be received by the department in respect of the said gold.
The department contended that if the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is implemented, it will lead to irreparable loss to the Department and it will also tantamount to defeating the purpose of filing the appeals by the department, as there is no provision for recovery of gold as such or for that matter, in respect of sales proceeds also under the Act or Rules.
The tribunal held that even when the sales proceeds are received and would be required to be returned to the Respondents, in terms of the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals), there is no clear cut provision or procedure for recovery of the same in case the appeals are allowed in favour of the department. Therefore, there is merit in the submissions made by the department that in the interest of justice as well as in view of wider powers given to the Tribunal for passing any appropriate interim order in respect of any appeal filed, the department has merit in their submissions and accordingly, allowed the stay applications.
Case Details
Case Title: Principal Commissioner of Customs Visakhapatnam – Customs Versus Shri Prashant Ramachandra Zende
Case No.: Customs Stay Application No. 30397 of 2024 in Customs Appeal No. 30551 of 2024
Date: 09.12.2024
Counsel For Appellant: Sandeep Payal
Counsel For Respondent: None
