9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 845X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h their authorized courier M/s. DHL Express India Pvt. Ltd. Chennai for the clearance of imported gods declared as "6769 pieces of button, 1155 pieces of polyester size label and 20116 pieces of snap button" covered under AWB No. 7937032320 and Invoice No. 2014-VEA-744 dated 16.5.2014 raised by M/s. Peuterey SPA Italy at a declared value of 1778.36 USD (FOB). The assessable value has been declared as Rs.1,30,208/- @ Rs.59.85 per USD. The imported goods were classified under CTH 96062990 and 48219090 and the weight declared was 47.50 kgs. Further, the consignee has also claimed nil duty under Customs Notification No. 012/2012 Sl. No. 232 for the item declared as "Button and Size Label". As there was a variation between the declaration and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 1151 numbers of men's leather jackets. As agreed the said customer arranged to send the buttons including snap buttons, leather and polyester size labels to be fitted on the jackets. Considering the urgency, the goods were dispatched through DHL Express India Private Ltd (DHL) in 3 packages covered by AWB No: 737032320 dated 16/05/2014 and Invoice No: 2014 - VEA -744 dated 16/05/2014. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the courier company mis-placed one out of the three packages sent to them on account of which the parcel delivery was delayed. The overseas customer insisted upon DHL to immediately clear the goods so that the export orders are executed. DHL for reasons best known filed BE No. 23597 dated 12.08.2014 in the appellant's name by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t on to hold that they were guilty of suppressing the facts and have mis-declared the value description and quantity of the goods with malafide intention to evade the payment of duty and imposed a disproportionate fine ono the goods and a penalty on the appellant. The appeal filed against the said order was also rejected by the Commissioner of Customs [Appeals] Chennai by holding that the grounds raised by them were an afterthought. Hence they are before this forum in appeal. C) Grounds of Appeal: The import of the subject goods are for use in the goods to be exported to the very same supplier and are unconditionally exempted from the payment of the customs duties in terms of serial no. 232 of notification no. 12/2012 Customs 17.03.2012. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fine and penalty. The goods are not prohibited for import. In M/s. Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. The State of Orissa [AIR 1970 SC 253] the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that 'Whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially and on a consideration of all the relevant circumstances'. 5. The assessable value of the goods involved in this case has been determined at Rs 6,54,349/-, with a fine of Rs 3,25,000/- and a penalty of Rs 1,50,000/-. I hence feel that the fine and penalty imposed in this case are excessive and needs to be moderated. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the matter I feel that a fine of Rs.6,500/- (Six Thousand Five hundred only) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
