Decided on October 17,1986



S.Kalyanam, - (1.)SINCE the impugned order appealed agianst prima facie is not based on any evidence against the petitioner and since the learned consultant for the petitioner and the learned DR agree to argue the appeal itself to-day taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of this case, prior deposit of the penalty is dispensed with pending disposal of the appeal to-day.
(2.)This appeal is directed against the order of Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras dated 29.1.1986. The original order has been passed by the Deputy Collector of Central Excise, Guntur on 22.8.1985 absolutely confiscating 2 pairs of bangles weighing 47.7 grams under Section 71(1) besides a penalty of Rs. 4,400/- under Section 74 of the Gold Control Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The impugned order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) dated 29.1.86 is not one on merits but one rejecting the appellant's appeal under Section 82A of the Act for non-deposit of the penalty. Normally I would be inclined to remit the matter back for reconsideration if the original order is found to be not legally sustainable but in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case when the original order passed against the appellant is not based on any evidence at all, 1 am inclined to think that on considerations of justice, equity and fairplay the appeal should be disposed of on merits without subjecting the appellant to the hardship and ordeal of another enquiry before another authority.
On 13.3.1985 at about 4 P.M. the Inspectors of Central Excise, Gold & Customs, Preventive Unit, Hqrs. Guntur visited the business premises of one Bhavani Jewellers at Vijayawada. At that time the appellant was found to be present in the shop and search and examination of the appellant by the authorities resulted in the recovery of 2 pairs of bangles weighing 47.7 grams from his pant pocket. The gold bangles were of 20 ct. purity totally valued at Rs. 8,825/-. The bangles were seized by the authorities and proceedings instituted thereafter under the Act ultimately culminated in the original order of adjudication of confiscation and imposition of penalty by the Deputy Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Guntur as referred to supra.

(3.)SHRI Parthasarathy, the learned consultant appearing for the appellant at the outset submitted that in the instant case no offence has been set out against the appellant at all in the show cause notice and the appellant has been penalised only on the ground that the appellant was in possession of 2 pairs of bangles and there is absolutely no evidence whatever against the appellant either adverted to or relied upon by the adjudicating authority in effecting confiscation of the appellants bangles absolutely and imposing a penalty under the Act.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.