TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 615X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion to them to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 2.50 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs fifty thousand only) in each case. In addition, the personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) has been imposed in each matter. 3. Appearing on behalf of the appellants, Shri Sudhir Mehta, ld. Advocate submits that they filed the bill of entry for clearance of the particular quantity of fabric. The classification of the goods were declared by them under 5407.61. However, the Revenue entertained a view that the correct classification of the goods was 5407.69 attracting higher rate of duty. They did not dispute such classification and debited duty in their DEEC Book accordingly. He submits that the dispute in the present appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orities. He also submits that the adjudicating authority has gone by the fact that the weight of fabric was not disclosed by them in the relevant documents. He submits that there is no provisions under the law to declare the weight of fabric which is relevant only for the purposes of classification. Non-mentioning of weight is only a technical lapse and is not on account of mala fide on their part. The same is relevant only for the purposes of calculation of duty which has been calculated by them in accordance with law in respect of imported goods and the duty debited accordingly in their DEEC Book. In support of his submissions, he relies on the Tribunal's decision in the case of M/s. Makali Metals Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. of Customs, Raigad re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he claim of wrong classification does not constitute mis-declaration so as to initiate the penal action the importer. 6. As regards the mis-declaration in respect of excess quantity of goods, the appellants have explained that the increase in Meters of fabric has resulted on account of bona fide mistake committed at the supplier s end. They have clarified that instead of sending fabric of 300 gms. per meter weight, they have despatched the fabric of 250 gms. per MT and inasmuch as the goods were despatched by them on weight basis, the same have resulted in more length. This was clarified by the high sea seller. It is the appellants contention that it was form their packing list submitted to the Revenue that more meterage of fabric came t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not sustained . The Tribunal observed that it is the value which has been taken into account for the purposes of calculation of duty. The appellants contention is that the duty on the full value and the excess quantity should not be confiscated and penalty should not be imposed against them. 9. By applying the ratio of the above decisions to the facts and circumstances of the instant case, I find that more Meters of fabric than the declared quantity have been detected by the Customs authorities based upon the packing list produced by the appellants. If it was the intention of the party, not to pay duty on the excess quantity of the fabric imported by them, packing list giving the exact quantity would not have been placed by them before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
