2023 (7) TMI 592 - AT - Customs

Confiscation - Redemption fine - Betel nuts of foreign origin - case of appellant is that he was not provided with the copies of Panchnama, Seizure Report and Recorded Statements of the two persons which have been relied upon by the Department to issue the Show Cause Notice - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - Admittedly there is no dispute that the vehicle in question is bearing Nepal Registration number and the owner of the vehicle has appeared before the Customs Officials and claimed the ownership and stated that the vehicle was taken for movement within Nepal only. The Driver has also corroborated the same stating that the goods were loaded at Birganj Nepal for delivery at Baiswal, Nepal. If these factual details are seen together, it would clarify that the goods were of foreign origin only. When the seizure was effected, the Appellant was nowhere in the picture. He suddenly emerges as the owner of the goods after about five months - It is surprising that the Appellant did not follow up to locate his consignment worth more than Rs.1.65 Lakhs (as given in the Invoice No. 10 dated 10/04/2015). After more than five months, he has approached the Customs Officials on the ground that he is the owner of the goods. It is seen from the records that he has not sought copies of the Panchnama, Recorded Statement etc. from the Adjudicating Authority. It is on record that he has not attended the Personal Hearings granted to him and OIO was passed ex-parte based on the facts available on record with the Department. Even in the Appeal filed before the Commissioner (Appeals), he has not raised the issue of non supply of these documents. It is seen from the present Appeal Papers, in their Grounds of Appeal, they have not raised the issue about non-supply of these documents. Therefore, the Appellant raising this issue at the time of final arguments now shows that it is only a ploy on their part to drag the case further knowing fully well that the Department may not be in a position to place all the details before the Appellant for the action taken in April 2015. From the OIO and OIA, it is seen that the lower Authorities have followed the principles of natural justice and passed detailed and considered orders justifying the Redemption fine imposed, Custom Duty demanded and penalty imposed on the Appellant - there are no reason to interfere with the impugned OIA - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the seizure of goods under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, the origin of the goods, proper procedures followed by the Department, ownership of the goods, redemption fine, customs duty, and penalty imposed on the Appellant.

Seizure of Goods:
Customs officials intercepted a vehicle loaded with cut Betel Nut coming from Nepal to India near the border. The driver failed to provide proper documents for the consignment. Statements were recorded from the detained persons, stating the goods were booked within Nepal. The Adjudicating Authority held the Betel Nuts were of foreign origin and confiscated them, imposing a redemption fine and customs duty.

Procedural Irregularities:
The Appellant's advocate argued that proper procedures and rules were not followed by the Department. The Appellant was not provided with copies of essential documents like Panchnama and Seizure Report. The advocate presented invoices to prove the goods were of Indian origin, requesting the Appeal to be allowed.

Ownership Dispute:
The Authorized Representative contended that the vehicle bore a Nepal registration number, and statements from the driver and owner confirmed the goods were meant for transportation within Nepal. The Appellant claimed ownership after a significant delay, providing photocopies of invoices whose authenticity couldn't be verified. The lower Authorities considered all submissions and imposed fines and penalties, concluding that the Appeal should be dismissed.

Judgment:
After hearing both sides and reviewing the documents, it was established that the vehicle and statements indicated the goods were of foreign origin. The Appellant's delayed claim of ownership raised doubts, especially regarding the lack of follow-up with the purported buyer. The Adjudicating Authority's adherence to natural justice principles was affirmed, leading to the dismissal of the Appeal. A direction was given to verify the accuracy of the Customs Duty calculation.