Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2019 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 1257 - AT - CustomsSeizure of imported goods - misdeclaration of goods - consignments consisting 229 bales, to the extent of 81 bales;81 bales were found to contain full pants and trousers in place of declared payjamas - penalties - HELD THAT:- The reason put forth by the Learned Counsel for the appellant, for importing full pants in place of indented pajamas, is not at all forthcoming from the said letter. The said letter does give any reason for the misdeclaration of 81 bales of cargo. Therefore, it is difficult to believe the submissions of the appellant that they had no Knowledge of the misdeclaration of the cargo. We find that Learned Commissioner has found that the goods are misdeclared; the appellants having filed bill of entry have misdeclared the goods. The valuation adopted in the impugned order is arbitrary. The Learned Commissioner has not recorded any reason for rejecting the declared value in respect of 148 bales. He proceeded to redetermine the value of all the goods when the misdeclaration was only in respect of 81 bales. Commissioner proceeded to redetermine the entire quantity of goods without giving any reasons for rejecting the value of the goods. The impugned order does not refer to any Valuation Rules and it does not make it clear if the CVR, 2007 have been followed sequentially. The valuation declared by the appellant is to be accepted. However, it is required to redetermine the value of 81 bales in dispute, which were misdeclared - the issue needs to go back to the adjudicating authority for proper appreciation of the Customs Valuation Rules and to redetermine the value accordingly - appeal allowed by way of remand. Penalty - HELD THAT:- The mens rea is not an essential ingredient either for the purposes of confiscation under Section 111 or for levy of penalty under 112(a)of the Customs Act, 1962. Therefore, the fact or otherwise of the appellant having intention or knowledge has no bearing on confiscation of the goods. To that extent, the impugned order is acceptable. The penalty imposable on the appellant will be equal to the duty that may be applicable on the 81 bales of garments misdeclared, subject to condition laid down in Section 112 (b) of the Customs Act, 1962.
|