Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 439 - CESTAT ALLAHABADConfiscation - undeclared third country origin goods listed in part A-1 & C of the Inventory valued at ₹ 34,39,445/- were brought into India in contravention of the provisions of N/N. 9/96-CUS(NT) dated 22.01.96 issued under Section of the Customs Act read with Section 3 of Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 - knitted garments declared in the Bill of Entry valued at ₹ 2,13,522/- used for concealment of the smuggled TCO goods were liable to confiscation at the same were used for concealing the TCO goods, that the undeclared Nepalese garments, personal effects and miscellaneous goods (listed in part A2, D & E of the inventory) used for concealment of the smuggled TCO goods were liable to confiscation under Section 111(d), (l) & (m) read with Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 - case of Revenue is that it appears that the appellants have been trying to make various place by way of cover-up and/or afterthought. Held that: - there is no conclusive finding as to the garments seized being of third country origin. So far, the goods being undeclared in the Bill of Entry being admitted in Nepalese Jackets its value at ₹ 33,000/- the declared garments valued at ₹ 32,74,945/- at the Annexure-A1 to Panchnama and I hold that the confiscation is bad and set aside the same along with redemption fine - So far the handicrafts goods at Annexure-B to the inventory admittedly there is no evidence of such goods being of third country origin and there are also the declared goods as per the Bill of Entry valued at ₹ 2,13,522/- and accordingly the confiscation set aside. So far, the undeclared goods being personal effects valued at ₹ 4700/- admittedly belonging to R.C. Sharma is concerned, the confiscation set aside in view of the admission by the said R.C. Sharma being an employee of the Government of India and the facts stated by him have not been found to be untrue and further the goods were of very small value and admittedly personal effects. So far, the goods at Annexure-E to the Panchnama being undeclared handicrafts value at ₹ 1,45,200/- is concerned. these goods are liable to confiscation but the appellant-exporter, Smt. Kamla Shreshta of M/s Pramila Handicrafts is entitled to redemption, on payment of redemption fine ₹ 25,000/-. So far, the two trucks are concerned, there is no finding save and except presumptions that the owners of the said trucks and its staff being drivers and cleaners were knowingly transporting any contraband goods. In this view of the matter, confiscation and redemption fine set aside. So far, the penalty imposed u/s 112 of the Act is concerned, considering the overall facts and circumstances and my findings hereinabove, the penalty imposed on Smt. Kamla Shreshta reduced from ₹ 25,000/- to ₹ 15,000/-, on Shri D.D. Pant from ₹ 30,000/- to ₹ 5,000/-. Further reduce the penalty on Shri Hari Kumar Thakuri from ₹ 20,000/- to ₹ 5000/- - So far the other appellants and/or parties are concerned, the penalties imposed on them fully set aside. Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant.
|