TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 418X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Penalty - Held that: - the ends of justice is will be met if imposed on this issue is fixed at ₹ 15,000/- - As regards the penalty imposed by the First Appellate Authority on a finding that the quantity of 118.27 MT of Rough Marble slabs which were excess than the quantity declared in respect of 12 Bills of Entry, I find that he was correct in coming to the conclusion that in the absence of goods, the same cannot be confiscated. To that extent, the impugned order is correct. Since the liability for confiscation of the Rough Marble Slabs is upheld, the penalty imposed on the appellants for such violation also needs to be upheld. It is noticed from the records that the value of the Rough Marble Slabs which was found excess in resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcess quantity was seized. Further investigation carried out and the visit to the CHA of the appellant indicated that the appellant had during the period April 2009 to June 2009 under the cover of 12 different Bills of Entry had imported excess quantity of 118.27 MT of Rough Marble Blocks involving differential duty of ₹ 2,46,220/-. The appellants paid off the differential duty alongwith interest on the earlier consignment and also on the live consignment. Show cause notice was issued for confiscation of the goods of live consignment and the 12 Bills of Entry of earlier consignments imported. The Adjudicating Authority after following due process of law confiscated the excess quantity of 10.84 MT of Rough Marble blocks with an option ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts. In my view, the First Appellate Authority was correct in upholding the confiscation of the Rough Marble slabs found excess than declared quantum in the Bills of Entry. However, I find that the value of the excess quantity of the Marbles which was found was ₹ 1,36,000 (Approx.) against which redemption fine of ₹ 41,000/- is imposed. To my view, the redemption fine imposed is disproportionate to the value of the goods. Conventionally, the Tribunal holds that approximately 20% of the value of the confiscated goods need to be imposed as redemption fine; following the said convention, I find that redemption fine imposed on the appellant for the quantity of 10.84 MT of excess Rough Marble slabs found needs to be reduced from ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
