Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2013 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 92 - AT - CustomsConfiscation of goods u/s 113(g) - Penalty under Section 114(iii) - Imposition of redemption fine - Held that:- redemption fine cannot be imposed if the goods are not available for confiscation unless the goods were allowed to be cleared subject to furnishing undertaking/bond etc. - imposition of redemption fine in the impugned order is not sustainable in law - Following decision of Shiva Kripa Ispat Pvt. Ltd. case [2009 (1) TMI 124 - CESTAT MUMBAI] and Raja Impex (P) Ltd. [2008 (4) TMI 320 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH] - Decided in favour of assessee. There is nothing in the language of the provisions of Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, to suggest that mens rea is essential for imposition of penalty. Mere ‘act or omission to act’ would suffice for imposition of penalty if such act or omission violates statutory provisions. Proceedings under Section 114 of the Customs Act are not criminal proceedings but quasi-judicial proceedings and hence mens rea is not required to impose penalty under the said section - The short time interval between the arrival of the goods in the port area and the sailing of the vessel could have led to the omission/default on the part of the CHA which could be a mitigating factor - Penalty reduced - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
|