2005 (8) TMI 465 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Confiscation of imported Tin Plates, imposition of redemption fine and personal penalty, interpretation of Transitional arrangements under Export and Import Policy 1997-2002

The judgment revolves around the confiscation of Tin Plates imported by the appellant, along with the imposition of a redemption fine and a personal penalty. The appellant had entered into a contract with an overseas supplier for the import of tin plates, with specific terms regarding shipment dates and payment conditions. However, a notification was issued fixing a minimum floor price after the contract was initiated. The Customs authorities required a license for clearance as the goods arrived after the issuance of the notification. The appellant argued that the shipment should not be confiscated based on the Transitional arrangements in the Export and Import Policy 1997-2002, which allow imports made within the original validity of an irrevocable letter of credit before the imposition of restrictions. The appellant's contention was that the extended letter of credit covered the shipment, but the authorities disagreed, stating that the benefit of the policy provision applies only if the shipment is made within the original validity period of the letter of credit, which in this case had expired before the actual shipment. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the confiscation of the goods but reduced the redemption fine and set aside the personal penalty due to the absence of any mala fide intentions on the part of the appellant.

In analyzing the case, the Tribunal referred to Para 1.5 of the Export and Import Policy 1997-2002, which provides for the continued import of goods freely permitted before any restrictions, as long as the shipment is made within the original validity period of the irrevocable letter of credit established before the imposition of restrictions. The Tribunal noted that in this instance, the original letter of credit had expired, and the subsequent shipment was made against the extended letter of credit, falling outside the original validity period. Therefore, the Tribunal concurred with the Departmental Representative that the appellant could not avail the benefit of the policy provision. The goods were deemed rightfully confiscated due to the applicable restrictions at the time of import, despite the reduction in the redemption fine and the annulment of the personal penalty based on the absence of any malicious intent on the part of the appellant.