2005 (8) TMI 555 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of teak wood for export under Customs Act, 1962.
2. Declaration discrepancies leading to confiscation.
3. Prohibition of export of sawn teak wood.
4. Imposition of fine and penalty.

Confiscation of Teak Wood for Export under Customs Act, 1962:
The appeal in question stemmed from the Commissioner of Customs' decision to confiscate 7,788 pieces of teak wood valued at over Rs. 32 lakhs under Sections 113(d) and (l) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner allowed the appellants the option to redeem the goods by paying a fine of Rs. 3 lakhs. The goods were confiscated as they were identified as sawn teak wood instead of the declared teak flooring panels, rendering them unsuitable for export.

Declaration Discrepancies Leading to Confiscation:
Despite the absence of representation from the appellants, the Tribunal examined the case based on records and the examination report. It was evident that the goods did not match the declared description of teak flooring panels, being instead sawn teak wood. Export of sawn teak wood was prohibited under the relevant Exim Policy unless exclusively made from imported teak logs/timber. The appellants admitted to not importing any teak logs/timber, confirming that the sawn timber was not sourced from imported logs/timber. Consequently, the goods were deemed liable for confiscation.

Prohibition of Export of Sawn Teak Wood:
The prohibition on exporting sawn teak wood, except under specific conditions related to imported teak logs/timber, was a crucial factor in the decision. The appellants' failure to adhere to these conditions by not using imported logs/timber for the sawn timber destined for export led to the confiscation of the goods. This restriction highlighted the importance of complying with export policies and accurately declaring the nature of goods being exported.

Imposition of Fine and Penalty:
In addition to confiscation, the Commissioner imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on the appellants. The Tribunal, after reviewing the case, found no grounds to alter the quantum of the fine and penalty. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order, affirming the confiscation of the teak wood, the fine, and the penalty, ultimately rejecting the appeal due to the discrepancies in the declaration and the violation of export policies.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues surrounding the confiscation of teak wood for export, the declaration discrepancies leading to confiscation, the prohibition of exporting sawn teak wood, and the imposition of fine and penalty in the case.