9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (3) TMI 604 - AT - CustomsQuantum of Redemption fine and penalty - Import of second hand photocopier - Held that - the value declared by the appellant has already been enhanced by the Revenue on the basis of the Chartered Engineer s certificate. It is seen that there is no evidence brought out by the revenue to show that the appellants had paid more than what he had declared to the customs. Therefore in such circumstances the Tribunal took a view to impose fine and penalty at 10% and 5% in many of the cases cited by the appellant. As this Bench cannot deviate from the ratio of its own decision we find that in all these cases the fine and penalty should be fixed only at 10% and 5% of the value of the imported goods determined by the Chartered Engineer respectively
Issues Involved:
Appeal against imposition of redemption fine and penalty for violation of EXIM provisions in importing second-hand photocopiers without a license and misdeclaration of value. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Violation of EXIM Provisions The appellants imported second-hand photocopiers without the required license, leading to a violation of the EXIM provisions as per the DGFT Circular. The Adjudicating Authority found a policy violation and misdeclaration of value, resulting in initiation of proceedings against the appellants. Issue 2: Imposition of Redemption Fine and Penalty The Adjudicating Authority ordered the goods liable for confiscation but allowed redemption on payment of a fine and imposed penalties. The appellants contested the redemption fine, claiming it was arbitrarily imposed without market enquiry and not in accordance with Section 125 of the Customs Act. They argued for a reduction based on previous Tribunal rulings where redemption fines were 10% and penalties were 5% of the value of goods. Issue 3: Appellants' Arguments The appellants challenged the quantum of redemption fine and penalty as exorbitant, emphasizing that the actual price paid for the goods was less than the value fixed by the Revenue based on the Chartered Engineer's certificate. They cited judicial decisions emphasizing the need for sound judicial principles in fixing redemption fines and determining market value. Issue 4: Department's Response The department argued that due to repeated violations by the appellants, a uniform fine and penalty of 10% and 5% could not be imposed. They urged the Tribunal to uphold the impugned order based on the repeated violations of the EXIM Policy. Judgment After careful consideration, the Tribunal found no evidence that the appellants paid more than the declared value. Following the precedent set by previous decisions, the Tribunal ruled to fix the fine and penalty at 10% and 5% of the value of the imported goods determined by the Chartered Engineer. The appeals were disposed of based on this ratio, and the judgment was pronounced on 10-3-2008.
|
