2001 (11) TMI 601 - AT - Customs

EXIM Policy - Special Import Licence - Import of Gold Jewellery - Penalty - Redemption fine, extent of - Bona fide belief

Summary

Issues:
- Whether redemption fine can be levied when the Commissioner has accepted the plea for re-export of imported items.
- Imposition of penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act on the appellant.
- Consideration of bona fide belief of the appellants for not imposing penalty.

Analysis:
1. The appeal questioned the imposition of redemption fine alongside the acceptance of the plea for re-export of plain gold jewelry. The appellant had imported items under a specific license, but policy changes led to confusion. The appellant believed they could continue importing under a certain notification. The argument was supported by legal precedents where redemption fines were not imposed when re-export was allowed.

2. The appellant's counsel highlighted judgments like Padia Sales Corpn. and Skantron (P) Ltd., emphasizing that penalties were not applicable in cases of genuine belief. Reference was made to the principle of mens rea for imposing penalties, citing Akbar Badruddin Jiwani v. CC. Several judgments were cited where penalties were deemed inapplicable, further supporting the appellant's case.

3. The Revenue defended the order based on the Commissioner's reasoning. However, the Tribunal noted that the Import Export Policy changes necessitated specific licenses for importing gold jewelry. Despite this, the Tribunal agreed with the appellant's argument that redemption fines should not be imposed when re-export options are granted. The order was modified to allow re-export without confirming any fines.

4. Regarding the imposition of penalties, the Tribunal found that the Commissioner had not fully considered the appellant's bona fide belief. The case was remanded for re-adjudication on penalty imposition. The Commissioner was directed to reassess whether penalties should be imposed and, if so, determine the appropriate quantum. The matter was set aside for a fresh consideration, providing an opportunity for the appellants to present their case regarding penalties.

5. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the matter for further consideration, emphasizing the need for a thorough review of penalty imposition and the option for re-export without redemption fines. The decision highlighted the importance of considering bona fide beliefs in penalty assessments and directed the Commissioner to re-examine all aspects of the case.