ARUN KUMAR PANTU Vs. COLLECTOR OF C EX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal, the appellant has challenged the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta in order No. 108 (Gold) 76/14 of 1979, dated 9-5-1979, confiscating the primary gold, assorted new gold ornaments, old and broken gold ornaments, bronzed based gold ornaments weighing altogether 469 grams under seizure in terms of provisions of Section 71 of the Gold Control Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act. But, however, the learned Collector had given option to redeem the aforesaid gold and gold ornaments on payment of a fine of rupees twenty thousand in terms of the provisions of Section 73 of the Act. The appellant has also challenged the imposition of Rs. 2 (two) lakhs as penalty for contravention of various provisions of Section 74 of the Act, as alleged in the show cause notice.

(2.) The facts necessary for determining this case are that the appellant is a licensed goldsmith and was proprietor of M/s. Nimta Jewellery Art at Madhusadan Banerjee Road, Nimta, Cal-49 at the material point of time. He was also doing pawn broker business and had obtained licence under the Bengal Money Lenders Act. The allegation against him as made out in the show cause notice is that his shop was raided on 4-12-1976 by the officers of the Central Excise of Gold Cell and recovered from the said workshop gold ornaments weighing altogether 469 grams valued at Rs. 18,408.00 and one private book from the said shop of the appellant. The appellant could not produce any evidence, documentary or otherwise in regard to the possession of the gold and gold ornaments, hence they seized it along with the private account book. His statement was recorded. The appellant had submitted that the gold and gold ornaments belonged to his customers and that, as he was illiterate, he could not write G 13 register, but however he assured the officers to produce the account books and account for the same at a later stage.

(3.) THE appellant in his written explanation to the show cause notice denied that he had dealt with gold or gold ornaments. Due to illiteracy he could not write G-13 register. He submitted that the entries in the private register were pawned by the customers, which remained unclaimed and small quantity were his family ornaments. He has utilized these gold ornaments in remaking new gold and gold ornaments received from his 'pawnees'. He submitted that he has received in good faith as a certified goldsmith and that as a licensed goldsmith, he could receive old gold ornaments for remaking. It was not a case of purchase and sale of gold and gold ornaments to third parties.