2012 (12) TMI 969 - CGOVT - Customs

Confiscation of goods - Commercial quantity goods - baggage declaration not present - Held that - Applicant passenger on arrival at the airport had reported at the red channel. There is no charge of misdeclaration or concealment of said goods. The goods are confiscated as the same were in commercial quantity and did not constitute bona fide baggage - Applicant has also requested to allow duty free baggage allowance as per rules. In this regards it is noted that the woollen textiles valuing 30, 000/- cannot be treated in commercial quantity and its value is also well within admissible duty free baggage allowance. Therefore said textiles valuing 30, 000/- may be allowed clearance under duty free baggage allowance available under the Baggage Rules. The other items are in commercial quantity and do not constitute bona fide baggage under Section 79 of Customs Act 1962 and said goods are imported in violation of Sections 79 30, 000/- is allowed under duty free baggage allowance - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Customs confiscation of goods not constituting bona fide baggage.
2. Imposition of redemption fine and penalty under Customs Act, 1962.
3. Appeal against the Orders-in-Appeal and Order-in-Original.
4. Request for re-export of goods and waiver of penalty.

Issue 1: Customs confiscation of goods not constituting bona fide baggage

The applicant arrived from Dubai at Amritsar airport with various items, including Rhodona, Vibra weighing scale, and woollen textiles. Customs officers confiscated these items valued at &8377; 4,51,000 under Sections 111(d), 111(i), 111(I), and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962, as they were considered to be in commercial quantity and not bona fide baggage. The applicant was given the option to redeem the goods for home consumption by paying a redemption fine of &8377; 50,000 under Section 125 of the Act. The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) upheld this decision, stating that the goods did not qualify as bona fide baggage under Section 79 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 2: Imposition of redemption fine and penalty under Customs Act, 1962

The applicant challenged the imposition of a redemption fine of &8377; 50,000 and a personal penalty of &8377; 30,000 under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The applicant argued that he should be allowed to re-export the goods on payment of a nominal fine, citing precedents where re-export permission was granted by the Government of India. The applicant contended that the penalty was unjustified as he had declared all goods at the red channel counter without evading customs duty. The Government noted the absence of misdeclaration but upheld the redemption fine and penalty, stating that the goods were not eligible for re-export under Section 80 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 3: Appeal against the Orders-in-Appeal and Order-in-Original

The applicant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the Order-in-Original passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal, leading the applicant to file a revision application under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962 before the Central Government. The applicant sought relief based on the provisions of Section 125 of the Act, emphasizing the possibility of re-exporting goods on payment of a redemption fine.

Issue 4: Request for re-export of goods and waiver of penalty

The applicant requested permission to re-export the goods out of India on payment of a nominal redemption fine, citing Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. The applicant argued that he should not be subjected to a heavy personal penalty as he had declared all goods at the red channel counter. The Government, however, denied the request for re-export, stating that the applicant had attempted to import the goods illegally and modified the Order-in-Appeal to allow clearance of woollen textiles under duty-free baggage allowance but upheld the confiscation of other items and the associated penalty.

---