Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 579 - AT - CustomsAttempt to export unfinished leather in the guise of finished leather - Prohibited goods or not - goods were already provisionally released and re-exported after reprocessing - Confiscation - redemption fine - penalty - HELD THAT:- It has to be noted that the goods were provisionally released, reprocessed and exported. Thus the goods are not available for confiscation at the time of passing the order by the adjudicating authority. In a similar situation, when the goods were exported after re-processing, in the case of VIJAYALAKSHMI LEATHERS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI [2000 (1) TMI 90 - CEGAT, CHENNAI] it was held that the imposition of redemption fine and penalties are required to be set aside. The facts of the said case revealed that the samples drawn and tested by CLRI, Chennai showed certain deficiencies and defects in the nature of a) absence of dyeing b) colour not distinctly different from that of crust c) thickness more than 1mm d) absence of protective coat e) absence snuffing / shaving on the grain. In the case of COMMISSIONER OF CUS. (AIR PORT) , CHENNAI VERSUS AVANTHI LEATHERS LTD. [2009 (7) TMI 1130 - CESTAT CHENNAI], the issue was similar whether the department held the goods to be unfinished leather for the reason of absence of protective coating. The goods were provisionally released. The exporter reprocessed the goods and exported the same. It was held that the confiscation and imposition of penalties are not warranted. After taking note of the fact that the goods have been provisionally released, re-processed and exported, it is opined that the confiscation of the goods is not warranted and justified. Accordingly, the redemption fine imposed is also to be set aside. The department has not been able to show any mens rea on the part of the appellant. Appellants herein have taken release of the goods reprocessed the same and exported. The appellants have already incurred considerable financial loss on taking back the goods reprocessing and exporting goods - noting these facts the penalty also set aside. The impugned order is set aside. The appeals are allowed.
|