Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (4) TMI 1202 - CESTAT BANGALORESmuggling - vessel on foreign run had been brought into India and diverted for repairs - smuggling of diesel oil, paint, thinner out of the ship in the night - removal of hardener from the vessel immediately prior to the arrival of Customs officers on board the vessel in the morning of 20.10.2012 - the quantity of paint on board exceeded the declaration by 41 liters and the quantity of thinner by 5 liters - Held that: - the impugned order to the extent of confiscation of the vessel M.V. Minnath under Section 111(f), 111(g) and 111(h) of the Customs Act is justified and its release on payment of redemption of the vessel on payment of ₹ 6,00,000/- under Section 125 of the Customs Act 1962 is justified and legal - Similarly, the confirmation of duty demand on the vessel M.V. Minnath represented by Steamer Agent, M/s. Costal shipping Link (I) Pvt. Ltd. to the extent of ₹ 6,65,072/- is also legal and proper. The confiscation of the stores and consequent, demand of duty and the redemption of ₹ 1 lakh is not justified because the Revenue has not produced any evidence on record to show that it is a smuggled goods and it is also a fact that after the repair, the vessel left along with stores. In this context, the Revenue can only demand duty for mis-declaration as there was some discrepancy in the stores declared by the Master of the vessel and the actual store recovered. Even though the vessel was carrying 6180 litre of diesel, 1045 litre of paint and 225 litre of thinner, only 5627 litre of diesel, 280 litre of paint and 80 litre of thinner were declared by the vessel. Therefore, as per the Commissioner, actual quantities of import appeared to have been mis-declared with the object of implementing a predetermined scheme of subsequent illegal diversion of the goods. In my opinion, the appellants are liable to pay the duty with regard to the excess quantity not declared by them. With regard to imposition of penalty of ₹ 50,000/- on the vessel M. v. Minnath, representative of M/s. Coastal Shipping Link (I) Pvt. Ltd. and the Steamer Agent under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 and penalty of ₹ 10,000/- on Shri Mohammed Adam, the Master of the vessel under Section 112(a) and 112(b) of Customs Act and also imposition of penalty of ₹ 50,000/- on the M/s. Coastal Shipping Links (I) Pvt. Ltd., Steamer Agent for the vessel under Section 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 is justified and is upheld. Though the Commissioner has also imposed penalty of ₹ 10,000/- on M/s. Sea Blue Shipyard under Section 112(b) and 117 of the Customs Act but the said party has not filed any appeal before this Tribunal. The original authority is directed to re-quantify the duty and fine as per the direction above and appropriate the same from the deposit made by the appellant - appeal allowed by way of remand.
|