Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6.2 On the issue of slight variation in the weight of the impugned gold bars it is the case of the appellant Shri Nitya Gopal Biswas that the same could be due to weighing error during drawal of Panchnama. The argument taken by the appellant has some force because standard weight of foreign marked gold bar is 116.640 gms. each and slight variation could be due to weighing or human error. This observation is also fortified by the stand taken by this very bench in the case of Kapildeo Prasad Vs. CC (Prev.), Patna[2002 (02) LCX 0099]. The arguments and ratio laid are contained in paras 9 & 12 below:-

9. He, further, contended that the Commissioner has observed that there is a discrepancy in the description of the gold in question. Whereas the voucher of M/s. Chauhan Zevares shows that the goods sold to the appellants was T.T. Bars (116.640 foreign marked) , the goods seized by the Officers are gold biscuits weighing 1868.800 gms. and of purity 998.7, 998.8 and 998.9, as certified by the India Government Mint, Calcutta. He has, further, observed that the sale voucher of M/s. Chauhan Zevares shows that the sixteen pieces were totally weighing 1866.240 gms. nd were of purity 999.00. From this he concluded that the documents produced by the appellants are not covering the seized gold in question. Shri Chattopadhyay, learned Consultant submits that in commercial parlance, there is no difference between the biscuits and the bar. T.T. Bars is an abbreviation form of gold biscuit of 10 tolas. As regards weight, he submitted that the bar of foreign origin of 10 tolas has a standard weight of 116.640 gms. As such, the total weight of the 16 pieces has been shown as 1866.240 gms. in the sale voucher of M/s. Chauhan Zevares. The difference in weight made by the Customs showing a difference of about two grams, is a human error. Similarly, he submits that all foreign gold biscuits are of a standard purity of 999.00 and the test report of the India Government Mint showing the purity of little less than 999.00 is nothing but the result of human error. In any case, he submits that there appears to be no doubts about the genuineness of the sale voucher by M/s. Chauhan Zevares Pvt. Ltd. and as such, the rejection of the same by the adjudicating authority on a minor pseudo-discrepancy is not warranted. 12.The? gold biscuits seized from Shri Awadesh Kr. Thakur have been confiscated by the adjudicating authority after rejecting the documentary evidence produced by the appellants showing the legal purchase of the same from M/s. Chauhan Zevares Pvt. Ltd. and by referring to certain discrepancy in the said document of the seized gold biscuits. However, I find that the discrepancies referred to by the adjudicating authority are not real inasmuch as he has held that whereas the sale voucher shows the goods to be T.T. Bars, the seized gold is biscuit. He has thus observed that such descriptive variation between the biscuits and the bars raises a reasonable doubt regarding the genuineness of the transaction. The appellants have contended that biscuits and the bars are synonymous terms used by the persons dealing in gold and are interchangeable T.T. Bars represent ten tola bars which are also referred to as biscuits. The Commissioner in his impugned Order has nowhere observed as to what is the difference between a biscuit and a bar. Similarly, as regards weight, I find that there is a variation of about 2 gms. in the weight of all the sixteen pieces of gold. The standard 10 tola bars weigh 116.640 gms, and as such, the total weight of 16 pieces of biscuits would come to 1866.240 gms, which is reflected in the sale voucher of M/s. Chauhan Zevares. Similarly, it is a matter of common knowledge that the standard purity of gold is 999.00. As such, as rightly contended by the learned consultant, the small variation in the weight or in the purity of gold is attributable to the human error and cannot be made the basis for rejecting the sale voucher of M/s. Chauhan Zevares who have admitted to have sold the goods to the appellants. This has also been observed by the Commissioner that M/s. Chauhan Zevares have subsequently stated that they were not sure that the gold under seizure was the same as was purchased from them. Naturally a person who has sold the gold, cannot confirm whether the gold seized by the Customs Officers from that person, is the same gold or not. But the said statement made by M/s. Chauhan Zevares further confirms that the sixteen pieces of gold were, in any case, purchased by Shri Kapildeo Prasad from the said M/s. Chauhan Zevares Pvt. Ltd. 6.3 The argument taken by Adjudicating authority is that details of sales tax paid and non existence of signatures of the buyer on the sale bill No. 422 dated- 28/8/2000 are essential to establish the genuine nature of the document. It is observed from the copies of the said bill and the original produced during the course of hearing that particular of sales tax registration number of M/s. Laljibhai Kanjibhai Soni are existing on bill No. 422 dated 29/8/2000. The claim of the appellant is that final price agreed is inclusive of sales tax.If the seller of the gold bars not issuing a sale bill by not showing sales tax paid or payable on the goods then buyer cannot be faulted with. No investigation has been done to know whether the seller in fact had paid sales tax on the said transaction or not. It is further observed from copies of bill dated 29/8/2000, existing at pages 198 & 199 of the appeal No.C/88/2008, that Copy at page 198 was argued to have been provided by appellant and copy at page 199 has been obtained by the investigation done at Ahmedabad. Both contain the same details except that top of the copy as available at page 199 is blackened out due to improper photocopying above the words Ornaments Merchant. Signature of the sellers as well as general handwriting of both the documents is also seemingly similar. No opinion of the handwriting expert has been obtained by the Revenue to pursue their case that both are copies represent different documents. Further records maintained by M/s. Lljibhai Kanjibhai Soni, enclosed with the appeal memorandum of the claimant, also show huge transactions in gold bars and many of the transactions of purchase & sale of gold are cheque sales. It is not the case of the Revenue that investigation with respect to some of the other entries in the accounts of M/s. Laljibhai Kanjibhai Soni, were also made and all were found to be bogus. Such records are maintained for the period prior and after the period when Sale Memo No. 422 datged-29/8/2000 was issued. As many as 4733 pcs. of gold bars are purchased & 4152 are sold by M/s. Laljibhai Kanjibhai Soni in August, 2000 alone. In the light of the above glaring evidences it cannot be said that sale Bill No. 422 dt. 29/8/2000 was created afterwards as a cover up as held by the Adjudicating authority.