9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1415X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vy melting scrap. But, on examination, it was found that 25.710 MTS only was Heavy Melting Scrap and the remaining 79.470 MTS was rod cuttings of length approximately 2 to 2.5 meters. Since it was found that the entire consignment was not heavy melting scrap but consisted of iron rods, on account of misdeclaration the goods were confiscated under section 111(l) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs.80,000/-. Penalty of Rs.10,000/- was also imposed on the appellant under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The iron rods were classified under Chapter Heading 7215 9090 confirming duty amount of Rs.3,26,772/-. 3. The learned counsel on behalf of the appellant submitted that the sales contract ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gly, Bill of Entry was assessed. The Revenue has also placed on record all the examination reports along with all the documents accompanied with the consignment. Letter dated 22.10.2012 is also placed on record wherein the appellant has stated the supplier must have sent the rods by mistake and lenient view to be taken and the cargo may be released without any further action and avoid show cause notice and personal hearing. Therefore, the appellant now cannot raise the issue of mutilation or of valuation which was not disputed before the authorities below. The Original Authority has relied upon contemporaneous value and accordingly, demanded duty on iron rods. Hence, the impugned order needs to be upheld. 5. Heard both sides. The examinati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccompanied the consignment declared the goods only as Heavy Metal Scrap; and there is no dispute that the appellant had also placed the purchase order only for Heavy Metal Scrap; and only after examination part of the goods, it was found to be Iron Rods cannot be alleged as misdeclaration on the part of the appellant. Therefore, the confiscation of goods under Section 111 (l) and (m) is set aside along with redemption fine and penalty under Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962.
7. In view of the above, we confirm the demand of duty and modify the impugned order only to the extent of setting aside redemption fine and penalty. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
( Order pronounced in Open Court on 23. 08. 2024. ) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
