Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2017 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 933 - DELHI HIGH COURTImposition of penalty u/s 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962 - mis-declaration of the description of the goods - IS 1000 Fibre-Optic Endoscope Surgical System - classified under CTH 9018.90 or otherwise - Whether deletion of penalty imposed u/s 114A justified? - Held that: - the precondition to impose penalty is the determination, after Show Cause Notice that non levy or short levy of customs duty was the result of mis-declaration. The Show Cause Notice was issued under the extended period, on account of the Revenue's contention that there was willful mis-declaration. The findings of the Commissioner clearly established the nature of the mis-declaration, i.e that instead of describing the products accurately, i.e. as da Vinci Surgical System it was described as an endoscopic surgical system. The CESTAT could not have set aside the penalty, which is mandatory. What the Revenue could not have done (and in fairness, did not) was to impose penalty in addition, u/s 112 (a); this is because of fifth proviso to Section 114A which stipulates that "Provided also that where any penalty has been levied under this section, no penalty shall be levied under section 112 or section 114." Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-Revenue.
|