2019 (3) TMI 452 - AT - Customs

Imposition of redemption fine - import of copper scrap druid - mis-declaration of description and value alongwith direction for re-export within three months - CBEC Circular No. 401/101/2011-Cus. III dated 22.06.2011 and JNCH Public Notice No. 94/2011 dated 07.07.2011 - Held that - Admittedly appellant has not been in possession of any licence issued by the Central Pollution Control Board and the goods imported by it has been mis-declared. The plea of appellant that both the copper and aluminium are insulated for which it was difficult for it to distinguish the goods is not acceptable for the reason that no supplier would supply a high priced goods against an order of less priced goods for which the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in imposing penalty for mis-declaration needs no interference. It is also an admissible fact that copper scrap druid are not absolutely permitted for import and these import is regulated by the licence to be issued by the Central Pollution Control Board which appellant did not have at the time of import but going by the CBEC Circular and Public notice such goods can be cleared for home consumption to the interested buyer with approval of the importer - the goods can be cleared to the intended buyer in possession of such licence upon execution of bonds by the appellant and payment of redemption fine as directed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Appeal alowed in part.

Summary

Issues:
Imposition of redemption fine under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 for mis-declaration and non-compliance.

Analysis:
1. Factual Background: The appellant imported goods declared as "Aluminium Scrap Twang" but contained copper scrap druid. The Customs Act adjudication order directed confiscation with a redemption fine of Rs. 3,00,000 for re-export due to copper scrap druid being prohibited goods. A penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 was also imposed for wilful suppression and incorrect description.

2. Appellant's Argument: The appellant contended that copper scrap druid was not absolutely prohibited, suggesting clearance for home consumption was feasible. They highlighted holding a valid license from the State Pollution Control Board and cited a similar case where restricted goods were cleared for home consumption based on CBEC Circular and JNCH Public Notice. The appellant argued that the re-export condition made the confiscation redundant.

3. Respondent's Response: The respondent emphasized the appellant's violation of hazardous waste rules and misdeclaration. They defended the Commissioner (Appeals) order, asserting no interference was warranted.

4. Tribunal's Decision: After considering arguments and case records, the Tribunal found the appellant lacked a Central Pollution Control Board license and misdeclared goods. The Tribunal rejected the appellant's defense of difficulty in distinguishing goods and upheld the penalty for misdeclaration. However, acknowledging the possibility of clearing goods for home consumption to an eligible buyer with the required license, the Tribunal modified the order. The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, removing the re-export condition upon payment of redemption fine and penalty as imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals).

5. Final Order: The Tribunal allowed the appeal partially, permitting clearance of goods to M/s Sunalco Alloys Pvt. Ltd. post verification of eligibility and bond execution by the appellant in accordance with JNCH Public Notice No. 94/2011 dated 07.07.2011.