Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1348 - AT - CustomsSkillful grafting to deceive the tribunal - Valuation of imported goods - advance royalties - related party transaction - non-inclusion of advance royalties paid to overseas supplier, a related person, and suppression of this fact at the time of import - confiscation - redemption fine - penalty - Held that: - a skilful grafting has been attempted with intent to deceive the Tribunal or that a master of the sleight, for reasons best known to such person, has inveigled the review committee into raising this ground incorrectly. In either situation, it does not do credit to the integrity or the expertise of officials who constituted this particular Review Committee. In the most polite terms; it can only be described as a matter of shame and it is expected the Central Board of Excise & Customs take steps to ensure that the incompetence and ineptitude is reflected in their records and that other officers are impressed upon the need to guard against such demonstrated deceit. Confiscation is a proceeding that follows the determination of goods having offended specific provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. With such confiscation, and consequent redemption, the offending goods lose that pejorative qualification and are regularised. When goods are subject to confiscation for misdeclaration of value, the offence of misdeclaration and its attendant tentacles get erased. Payment of duty is, thereby, on goods that are no longer offending and, hence, cannot be imposed with another penalty u/s 114A. Adjudicating authorities should be mindful of this position and choose the penalty that they wish to impose. With the mandatory nature of section 114A in the circumstances enumerated therein, the imposition of penalty u/s 112 would compromise recourse to section 114A - In the present instance, only one of the penalties could have been imposed and the adjudicating authority has, by adopting section 112, regularised the offence of misdeclaration to foreclose imposition of penalty under section 114A - penalty u/s 114A is mandatory and, by setting aside the penalty on the importers u/s 112, remand the matter back to original authority to determine the imposition of penalty afresh. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|