The court's decision was based on the finding that no substantial question of law arose in the appeal, and therefore upheld the penalty for smuggling gold.

( 1 ) BY an order made by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, the appellant s appeal was dismissed. Before us it is prayed that the matter involves substantial questions of law insofar as the jurisdiction is concerned. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant the penalty could not have been imposed.

( 2 ) THE Tribunal, which is the final fact-finding authority, on appreciation of evidence, considering the contentions raised by the appellant in para 7, arrived at a conclusion in para 8 about the modus operandi adopted by the appellant and co-noticees in respect of the gold smuggled into India which was duly corroborated by the statement of other persons. It is found by the Tribunal that the appellant was actively involved i. n the smuggling of gold.

( 3 ) THE learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has not considered all the submissions. In such a situation, the appellant ought to have moved the Tribunal to point out that he has raised the contentions and they have not been dealt with by the Tribunal.

( 4 ) WE feel that no substantial question of law arises in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed.