Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 269 - CESTAT MUMBAIMisdeclaration of export goods - whether main appellant has mis-declared the goods for export, rendering them liable for confiscation, hence to be penalised and redemption fine to be imposed; another appellant-CHA is to be penalised for violation of Customs Act or otherwise? Held that: - there is no dispute that there was mis match of the description given on the packages and the documents. It is also undisputed that the goods were found of standard quality of drug intermediate and were not prohibited goods. It is also undisputed that on provisional release of the seized goods, the same were exported at the same value - there was negligence and carelessness on the part of main appellant and the CHA which has rendered the goods liable for confiscation. The redemption fine and penalty imposed are excessive on the face of the fact there was exportation of the same goods at the same value at a latter stage and undisputedly not questioned - Accordingly holding that goods are liable for confiscation, the redemption fine imposed is reduced to Rupees one lakh and consequent penalty to ₹ 50,000/- on the main appellant. As regards penalty imposed on the CHA, the same is u/s 114 of Customs Act - there is no act, omission or commission on the part of CHA which would have rendered the goods liable for confiscation as the goods may have been presented as they were received along with ARE-1 from the factory - penalty set aside. Appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant.
|