2009 (9) TMI 794 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Valuation of goods by customs authorities
2. Penalty imposed for misdeclaration of goods
3. Remission of duty under Section 23(2) of the Customs Act, 1962
4. Appeal for waiver of predeposit of penalty
5. Reduction of penalty amount from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 15,000

Valuation of goods by customs authorities:
The appellant declared the goods as per invoice, but upon examination, the customs authorities found discrepancies, revaluing the goods at Rs. 3,60,270 instead of the declared value of Rs. 2,69,319. The appellant chose to abandon the goods to avoid adjudication. The authorities imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000, which the appellant contested as disproportionately high.

Penalty imposed for misdeclaration of goods:
The JCDR supported the impugned order, citing Section 23(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, which allowed remission of duty for abandoned goods but did not provide immunity from penal action for offenses like misdeclaration. The JCDR highlighted a differential duty of around Rs. 35,000 due to the misdeclaration.

Remission of duty under Section 23(2) of the Customs Act, 1962:
The Tribunal noted that the proviso to Section 23(2) was added after the relevant date of the case. While Section 23(2) granted remission from duties, the appellants remained liable for penalty due to misdeclaration. Considering the circumstances and the differential duty amount, the Tribunal reduced the penalty from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 15,000.

Appeal for waiver of predeposit of penalty:
Both sides were heard, and despite the penalty being a petty amount, the Tribunal waived the requirement of predeposit and proceeded with the appeal on merit. The Tribunal acknowledged the liability for penalty but adjusted the amount based on the facts and circumstances of the case.

Reduction of penalty amount from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 15,000:
The Tribunal rejected the appeal except for the reduction in the penalty amount, which was decreased from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 15,000 considering the differential duty involved and the specifics of the case. The decision was pronounced in open court.