Tax Management India.Com

Home Page

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (1) TMI 723

Illegal import - misdeclaration of goods - enhancement of value - as the goods were not properly declared for contents as well as value and accordingly, apart from proposing confiscation of the goods, enhancement of value, notice also proposed penalties on various noticees Held that: - It is a fact that the courier consignment did not contain the necessary statutory details on the pack. The details contained were vague and there was a clear attempt in mis-declaration of high value electronic items to avoid customs duty - Much after interception of cargo, the appellant came forward with invoice and other details claiming ownership of the goods. Even at that time, the appellant could not produce necessary supporting evidence with reference to booking of consignment at Hong Kong and also the reason for invoice dated 15.04.2012 not having full particulars like name etc. of the imported goods. - Penalty on custodian - Held that: - The custodian had no prior information about any possible attempt of improper importation of goods through courier service. In any case, the impugned order did not bring out the exact violation committed by the custodian with reference to the present cargo .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ties of 2GB/4GB. 500 pieces of connectors and one set of printed cylinder with cover were also found. Detailed follow up investigation was conducted on the ground that there was an attempt to illegally import these electronic items with mis-declaration of contents as well as value in order to evade proper customs duty. Statements of various persons connected to the shipment were recorded and connected documents were collected by the officers. On completion of the investigation, the following facts /inferences were arrived at by the Revenue:- (i) Goods concerned are covered under AWB no.160-2580-4315 dated 22.04.2012 sent by M/s.Taj Express Courier in the name of M/s.Cruze Couriers Pvt. Ltd. vide courier tag No.CX676126 through Cathay Pacific Flight No.CX 695. (ii) Scrutiny of the documents available with the consignment reveal that they do not reflect complete address of receiver and also do not declare the description of the goods. Moreover, there was no invoice accompanying the goods. As per HAWB goods are consigned to Mr. Tarun, M/s. Raja Traders and M/s. Xtra Image, the same were placed under seizure vide Seizure Panchnama dated 23.04.2012 upon reason to believe that the same a .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

did not produce documents relating to booking of consignments at Hong Kong as claimed by them. No invoice relating to goods was found along with th goods at the time of examination by the officers on 23.04.2012. The Airway bill had shown that the consignment was shipped to one M/s.Raja Traders with no identifiable address or contact, which was later, amended to M/s.Sardana Enterprises. Such substitution, which was much after the interception of cargo by the customs, is only to avoid penal provisions, as an afterthought after attempted illicit import was detected. 5. The appellant submitted explanation on their part in response to the show cause notice. The case was adjudged by the Original Authority, who held that the goods claimed by the appellant viz. 50,000 pieces of Micro SD Memory Cards, which included 12500 2 GB Strontratium‟ brand memory cards are liable for confiscation. The goods were allowed to be redeemed on payment of a fine of ₹ 15 lakhs in terms of Section 125 of the Act. The value of the imported goods was re-determined at ₹ 57,69,008/- with a duty liability of ₹ 5,39,747/-. A penalty of ₹ 2 lakh under Section 112(a) with a further penal .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ption of cargo, the appellant came forward with invoice and other details claiming ownership of the goods. We note that even at that time, the appellant could not produce necessary supporting evidence with reference to booking of consignment at Hong Kong and also the reason for invoice dated 15.04.2012 not having full particulars like name etc. of the imported goods. We note that that the facts and circumstances of the case, as revealed by the investigation, have been examined by the Original Authority before arriving at a conclusion. In this regard, the Original Authority observed as below:- From the statement of Shri Gopal Sardana, Proprietor of M/s. Sardana Enterprises, it is clear that the consignment worth USD 67500.00 was imported from Panash Group on credit basis and the deal was made through his friend Rakesh Chotrani. I also note that Shir Gopal Sardana has also admitted that he had not taken any paper related to the goods from Panash Group as they had told him that the goods would be cleared from Customs by the person of Taj International and the duty was to be paid by the courier company at the time of clearance and at the time of delivery he was to pay duty to the couri .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

hat already a penalty of ₹ 2 lakhs has been imposed on the appellant, we find that penalty under Section 114 AA can be reduced to ₹ 1 lakh. Such reduction is justifiable keeping in mind that the total duty involvement in the present consignment itself is only ₹ 5.39 lakhs. 15. In view of the above discussion and analysis, we dismiss the appeal filed by M/s.Sardana Enterprises except for reduction of redemption fine and panalty under Section 114 AA, as mentioned above. 16. The second appeal is by M/s. Express Industry Council of India against imposition of penalty of ₹ 50,000/- under Section 117 of the Act. We have heard the ld. Counsel for the appellant and ld. AR for the Revenue. The impugned order held against the appellant, who is authorized to handle cargo in the customs area, only on the ground that they have been allowed another person as a sub-contractor to do the activity of handling cargo. This was held to be in violation of Regulation 6 (1)(h) of 2009 Regulations. The said Regulation stipulates that the custodian shall not permit for import cargo to enter the customs area or to be unloaded therein without the import report or import manifest having .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →