2001 (9) TMI 1072 - Commission - Customs

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the oral declaration made by the applicant.
2. Entitlement to the goods or sale proceeds.
3. Liability to pay duty and eligibility for immunities.
4. Procedural compliance by the Revenue.
5. Determination of duty and penalties.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the Oral Declaration:
The applicant, upon arrival at Bangalore Airport, made an oral declaration of the goods in his baggage, valuing them at Rs. 35,000/-. However, a detailed examination by Customs officers revealed electronic goods worth Rs. 18,38,300/- (CIF). The discrepancy between the declared and actual goods led to the issuance of a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 23-5-2000.

2. Entitlement to the Goods or Sale Proceeds:
The applicant initially claimed the goods belonged to one Shri Jinnah of Chennai, but later, through his Advocate, made a claim for the goods in a petition before the Special Court for Economic Offences. Despite the applicant's claim, the Revenue disposed of the goods without notifying him, violating Section 150 of the Customs Act. Consequently, the applicant is entitled to the sale proceeds of Rs. 15,83,355/-.

3. Liability to Pay Duty and Eligibility for Immunities:
The applicant admitted additional duty liability of Rs. 10,04,465/-, which was to be adjusted from the sale proceeds. The Commission determined the duty payable to be Rs. 11,25,040/-, considering the goods as commercial quantity and not bona fide baggage, thus denying baggage free allowance and imposing a 4% special additional duty. The applicant's full and true disclosure of duty liability and his cooperation entitled him to certain immunities.

4. Procedural Compliance by the Revenue:
The Revenue failed to provide the case records and comments on Annexure II despite multiple reminders. Additionally, they did not issue a notice to Shri Jinnah, implying acceptance of the applicant as the owner of the goods. The Commission noted the absence of any incriminating materials at the applicant's or Shri Jinnah's premises, supporting the applicant's claim.

5. Determination of Duty and Penalties:
The Commission settled the duty payable at Rs. 11,25,040/-, to be adjusted from the sale proceeds. Given the full and true disclosure, the applicant was granted immunity from payment of fine and interest. However, a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- was imposed for the attempt at clearance without duty payment and smuggling, with immunity granted in excess thereof. Immunity from prosecution under the Customs Act was also provided.

Conclusion:
The application was settled with the following terms:
1. Duty payable on the goods settled at Rs. 11,25,040/-.
2. Duty amount to be adjusted from the sale proceeds of Rs. 15,83,355/-.
3. Immunity from payment of fine and interest granted.
4. Penalty of Rs. 25,000/- imposed, with immunity in excess thereof.
5. Immunity from prosecution under the Customs Act granted.
6. Settlement void if obtained by fraudulent means, as per Section 127H(3) of the Act.

← Previous Next →