9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff Heading, Requirement of specific import license, Confiscation of goods, Imposition of penalty
Classification of Goods: The case involved the classification of imported goods, specifically "Pritt Sticks," which were found to be in the form of "Glue Stick" packed in special small plastic containers. The issue was whether the goods should be classified under Customs Tariff Heading 3501.90 as claimed by the importers or under Customs Tariff Heading 3506.10 as contended by the department. The tribunal determined that the goods fell under Customs Tariff Heading 3506.10 as they were glue in stick form packed in special small containers, making them consumer goods requiring a specific license for import. Requirement of Specific Import License: Another key issue was whether the import of the goods without a specific license was in contravention of the law, rendering the goods liable for confiscation and the importer liable for a penalty. The Additional Commissioner of Customs adjudicated that the import was not in accordance with the law due to the absence of a specific license, leading to the goods being liable for confiscation and the importer for a penalty. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside this decision, accepting the special import license as sufficient for clearance of the goods. The tribunal disagreed with this decision and held that the goods required a specific license for import under Customs Tariff Heading 3506.10. Confiscation of Goods and Imposition of Penalty: The tribunal found that the goods were indeed liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) due to the import without the necessary specific license. However, considering the value of the goods, the tribunal reduced the fine imposed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs. The penalty imposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962, was set aside due to the importers' bona fide belief, based on earlier clearance, that the goods could be cleared with a special import license. Therefore, the appeal was partly allowed, confirming the confiscation of the goods but modifying the fine and setting aside the penalty. In conclusion, the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai clarified the classification of the imported goods under Customs Tariff Heading 3506.10, emphasized the requirement of a specific import license for certain consumer goods, upheld the confiscation of the goods under Section 111(d), reduced the fine imposed, and set aside the penalty considering the importers' belief based on previous clearance.
|
