Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 377 - AT - CustomsReduction in quantum of Redemption Fine and Penalty - import of Sri Lankan Areca Nuts - restricted goods or not - misdeclaration of goods - declared value being higher than the threshold limit as per notification No. 20/2015-2020 issued by the Department of Commerce - goods freely importable or not - HELD THAT:- The impugned goods were freely importable and there is no allegation of misdeclaration of goods and there is no evidence on record to show that the appellant has acted with malafied intention to import substandard goods intentionally. It is a fact that on test, it was found that the goods are of substandard and is not fit for human consumption and therefore original authority as well as the appellate authority both allowed re-export of the same. As far as the demand of redemption fine and penalty is concerned, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly relied upon various decisions of the Tribunal involving similar circumstances of re-export of food items, after being denied NOC by FSSAI and took the lenient view and rightly reduce the fine and the penalty - reliance can be placed in the case of M/S. ROYAL IMPORTS & EXPORTS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS TUTICORIN [2021 (3) TMI 937 - CESTAT CHENNAI]. For reducing the penalty under Section 112 (a) (i), the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the decisions in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT) CHENNAI-I VERSUS BANSAL INDUSTRIES [2006 (9) TMI 58 - HIGH COURT, MADRAS]. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly observed that in the absence of malafide on the part of the appellant penalty is reduced to Rs. 50,000/-. There is no infirmity in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) reducing the redemption fine under Section 125(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 to Rs. 1,00,000/- and penalty under section 112(a)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 to Rs. 50,000/- - the impugned goods are lying on the port since 10.11.2020 but the customs authorities did not bother to comply with the order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). It shows complete insensivity of the officers to the financial loss occurring to the respondent due to deterioration of goods, in addition to, it shows complete dereliction of duty on their part. The assessable value of the consignment was Rs. 49,24,504/- and the respondent has paid the duty of Rs. 3,52,439/- as recorded in the impugned order, moreover the respondent also paid Rs. 1,50,000/- towards redemption fine and penalty but the customs authorities below did not release the goods for re-export thereby allowing the goods to further deteriorate in quality and in addition incurring huge demurrage due to lapse of considerable time for no fault of the respondent. It is deemed appropriate to direct the Chief Commissioner of Customs, Delhi to hold necessary inquiry into the matter regarding the delay caused in not allowing the re-export of the goods and take appropriate action against the errant officials - the impugned goods are directed to be released immediately to the respondent for the purpose of re-export and refund the duty back to the respondent as observed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. The appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
|