2008 (2) TMI 756 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Imposition of redemption fine and penalty for misdeclaration of imported goods.

Analysis:
The judgment involves three appeals arising from identical orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Indore. The dispute centers around the imposition of redemption fine and penalty due to misdeclaration of imported goods. The appellant, engaged in the manufacture of color picture tubes, imported Glass Panels from suppliers in China. The appellant declared the importation of glass panels in Bills of Entry, but discrepancies were found upon inspection. The containers were supposed to contain specific sizes of glass panels, but different sizes were found, leading to confusion. The appellant argued that any mistake was not intentional but due to a mix-up by the suppliers. The Tribunal considered the submissions and concluded that the payment of less duty for the wrongly declared glass panels was a bona fide mistake, and no redemption fine or penalty should have been imposed in this regard.

Regarding the other two appeals, where a similar misdeclaration occurred, the Tribunal acknowledged that the incorrect declaration made out a case of confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act. The section provides for confiscation when goods do not correspond with the entry made. The appellant contended that there was no mala fide intent and requested leniency in imposing redemption fine and penalty. The Tribunal noted that Section 111 does not require proof of mens rea for imposing redemption fine or penalty. While upholding the Commissioner's decision on these appeals, the Tribunal decided to reduce the redemption fine and penalty amounts by 50% in the interest of justice. The modified order specified reduced amounts for redemption fine and penalty compared to the Commissioner's initial decision.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed Appeal No. 255/05 and partially allowed Appeal Nos. 256 and 257/2005 by reducing the redemption fine and penalty amounts. The judgment highlights the importance of accurate declaration of imported goods to avoid penalties and confiscation under the Customs Act. The decision emphasizes the need for diligence in ensuring correct information in Bills of Entry to prevent misunderstandings and potential legal consequences.