1990 (5) TMI 163 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Legality and propriety of the order passed by the learned Collector of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals) under Section 129D(2) of the Customs Act, 1962.
2. Consideration of reasons given by the Deputy Collector while imposing the redemption fine.

Analysis:

1. The appeal was filed against the order of the Collector of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals) setting aside the Adjudicating Authority's decision and directing re-adjudication concerning the imposition of a redemption fine on unauthorised goods. The appellants contested the legality of the appeal authorization under Section 129D(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The argument was made that while no legality issue existed, the propriety of the order was in question. The term "propriety" was defined as appropriateness or rightness. The Collector's order for appeal determination focused on the propriety of allowing redemption of goods with a nominal fine without a valid import license, indicating compliance with Section 129D(2). The contention against the authorization was dismissed.

2. The second issue raised was the alleged failure of the Collector (Appeals) to consider the Deputy Collector's reasoning for the redemption fine. The Deputy Collector's rationale included the past practice of allowing similar consignments to pass customs, influencing the imposition of a nominal fine. The Collector (Appeals) only mentioned the normal practice of higher fines for unlicensed goods without addressing the specific grounds provided by the Deputy Collector. The Tribunal found that the Collector did not adequately consider the Deputy Collector's reasoning, leading to a remand for a fresh decision. The appeal was allowed for reconsideration by the Collector (Appeals) in light of the Deputy Collector's reasoning to ensure a proper assessment of the case.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues of legality and propriety in appeal authorization under the Customs Act, as well as the importance of considering the adjudicating officer's reasoning for imposing fines in customs cases.