Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2024 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 28 - AT - CustomsLevy of customs duty - Aviation Turbine Fuel (ATF) - confiscation u/s 111 (f) (j) and (m) - penalty - Whether fine is required to be imposed on the non-prohibited goods once held confiscated and whether fine in lieu of confiscation of ATF is required to be imposed by the Commissioner - inclusion of freight insurance and landing charges as to the FOB value to determine the duty on the ATF - HELD THAT:- As per section 125 when goods are confiscated an option may be given in case of prohibited goods and shall be given in the case of other goods to the importer to pay a redemption fine in lieu of confiscation. If the importer opts to pay the redemption fine and pays it, the goods will be returned to the importer. If the importer does not opt to pay the redemption fine, the goods will stand confiscated. In this case, although the goods were confiscated it was only a notional confiscation because the goods were not available at all. The case of the Revenue is the redemption fine must have been imposed in lieu of confiscation. We do not find any force in this submission of the Revenue. If the redemption fine is imposed, it cannot be extracted from the respondents because redemption fine is only an option and the respondent may not opt for it. If the respondents opts for it and pays the redemption fine then Revenue will have to return the confiscated goods which the Revenue cannot do in this case because the goods no longer exist. Valuation - The cost of the freight, transit insurance and the landing charges being ascertainable as NIL, they cannot be included in the value of the ATF. In the appellant’s own case in Customs Appeal, this Tribunal by its final order [2018 (4) TMI 785 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] held that the cost of freight, insurance and landing charges need not be included while arising the duty on the ATF consumed in the fuel tank of the aircraft. This Tribunal has also held so in final order in the appellant’s own case [2019 (4) TMI 2132 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] . Thus, we find no force in the appeal of the Revenue. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed and the impugned order is upheld with consequential relief, if any, to the respondent - The miscellaneous application also stands disposed of.
|