Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Mr. Chen Gao Sheng, M/s. Devi Shipping Agency Versus Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) , West Bengal, Kolkata

2016 (8) TMI 31 - CESTAT KOLKATA

Levy of redemption fine - excess quantity of fuel oil, diesel oil and lube oil found in the ship stores in the vessel - In addition penalty of ₹ 10.00 Lakhs has also been imposed upon the Master of the vessel under section 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. - Held that:- One of the arguments given by the ld.Advocate of the Appellants is that vessel was anchored at Sandheads on 05.08.2009 whereas vessel arrival report was filed on 11.08.2009. That the difference is due to oil consu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion under Section 111(f) of the Customs Act, 1962. - The verbal requests and written undertakings given by the Appellants can be considered as a bond/undertaking given by the Appellants for the release of the vessel with respect to excess quantities of oils found by the department. - The redemption fine and penalties are correctly imposed by the adjudicating authority upon Appellant Mr.Chen Gao Sheng (Master of vessel M.V. Medi Firenze) by holding that undertakings given before the adjud .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

CUS/CCP/ADJN/WB/2009 dated 07.09.2009. Appeal No.C/576/09 is filed by Mr.Chen Gao Sheng (Master of the vessel M.V. Medi Firenze) with respect to redemption fine of ₹ 10.00 Lakh imposed with respect to excess quantity of fuel oil, diesel oil and lube oil found in the ship stores in the vessel. In addition penalty of ₹ 10.00 Lakhs has also been imposed upon the Master of the vessel under section 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. Appeal No.C-577/09 has been filed by M/s.Devi S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Devi Shipping Agency while filing the vessel stores list as part of the Import General Manifest(IGM) inadvertently declared the quantity of lube oil as 2500 ltrs. That the quantity of lube oil indicated in IGM was only a clerical error at the time of filing IGM which should actually be read as 25,000 ltrs.. Ld. Advocate argued that there was no malafide intention, willful misstatement to evade payment of any Customs duty. It is also the case of the ld.Advocate that no bond/bank guarantee was exe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ient. 3. Ms.Debi Parbat (Advocate) appearing on behalf of M/s.Devi Shipping Agency argued that her client by mistake declared a quantity of 2500 ltrs. of lube oil in the IGM in place of 25,000 ltrs. declared in the vessel arrival report by the Master of the vessel. It is her case that it is a clerical mistake and no penalty is attracted against the Appellant. 4. Shri S.K.Naskar, AC(AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that as per IGM filed the quantity of furnace oil, diesel oil and lub .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Appellants made request for release of the vessel and undertook payment of fine and penalty, if any, imposed upon the Appellants. That the goods mis-declared are liable to confiscation under Section 111(f) of the Customs Act, 1962 as per the findings of the adjudicating authority. He also relied upon a letter dated 25.08.2009 written to CC(Prev.), Kolkata by the Appellant M/s.Devi Shipping Agency. He made the Bench go through para IV of this letter to argue that Appellants agreed to pay redempt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion under Section 111(f) of the Customs Act, 1962. Section 111(f) pertains to any dutiable or prohibited goods required to be mentioned under the regulation in an Import Manifest which are not so mentioned and that the same are liable to confiscation. In the present proceedings a quantity of 997.34 MT of furnace oil, 40.50 MT of diesel oil and 2500 ltrs. of lube oil were declared in the IGM whereas actual quantities on rummaging were found to be 1022.30 MT, 41.60 MT and 25,200 ltrs. respectively .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o be in excess of what was given by the Master of the vessel in the vessel arrival report. One of the arguments given by the ld.Advocate of the Appellants is that vessel was anchored at Sandheads on 05.08.2009 whereas vessel arrival report was filed on 11.08.2009. That the difference is due to oil consumption when the vessel was anchored at the Sandheads from 05.08.2009 to 11.08.2009. The explanation given by the ld.Advocate can hold to explain consumption of lube oil and other oils and the resu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

der a bond therefore no redemption fine can be imposed as goods are not available for confiscation. In this regard it is observed that Master of the vessel M.V. Medi Firenze made verbal request during adjudication proceedings and undertook payment of fine and penalty if mis-declared goods are found liable to confiscation. Similarly Appellant M/s.Devi Shipping Agency representing Master of the vessel undertook in writing by letter dated 25.08.2009 showed their willingness to pay fine and penalty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version