2008 (8) TMI 656 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Seizure and confiscation of war items in a consignment of old and used pipes
- Confiscation and penalty under Section 119 of Customs Act, 1962
- Pre-shipment certificate requirement and its absence
- Justification for confiscation and imposition of redemption fine
- Consideration of demurrage, storage charges, and reduction of redemption fine and penalty

Seizure and Confiscation of War Items:
The appellants filed a bill of entry for clearance of old and used pipes but the consignment was found to contain war items like used ammunitions and broken armoured vehicles. The impugned order resulted in the absolute confiscation of the war items and confiscation of the old and used pipes under Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants argued that they purchased the material on high sea sale basis and did not order war material. They requested a lenient view due to heavy expenses incurred. The Revenue contended that the old and used pipes were used to conceal the war items, justifying the confiscation.

Confiscation and Penalty under Section 119:
The appellants' argument was based on the lack of intention to import war material and the high penalty imposed. The Tribunal noted that the appellants failed to insist on a pre-shipment certificate required by law during the high sea purchase, indicating a lack of precaution. The absence of the certificate and the declaration of the goods as old and used pipes while containing war material justified the confiscation under Section 119. However, considering the demurrage and storage charges incurred, the redemption fine was reduced to Rs. 1 lakh and the penalty to Rs. 5,000.

Pre-shipment Certificate Requirement:
The Tribunal emphasized the importance of the pre-shipment certificate, which was not submitted by the appellants. The absence of this certificate, along with the use of old and used pipes to conceal war items, supported the decision of confiscation and imposition of redemption fine.

Justification for Confiscation and Imposition of Redemption Fine:
The Tribunal found that the appellants were not entirely innocent as they failed to obtain the necessary pre-shipment certificate, which was a crucial requirement under the law. The use of old and used pipes to hide war items indicated an attempt to conceal the true nature of the consignment, justifying the confiscation under Section 119.

Consideration of Demurrage, Storage Charges, and Reduction of Redemption Fine and Penalty:
Despite upholding the confiscation, the Tribunal acknowledged the heavy demurrage and storage costs incurred by the appellants. Consequently, the redemption fine was reduced to Rs. 1 lakh and the penalty to Rs. 5,000 to account for the circumstances and expenses faced by the appellants. The appeal filed by the appellants was rejected, and the cross-objection filed by the Revenue was disposed of.