2011 (8) TMI 281 - HC - Customs

Confiscation of the goods, and imposed penalty - Search - Thiru.Sahul Hameed during enquiry admitted that he was a trader in foreign goods, and that he mis-declared the value to evade duty. The Joint Commissioner of Customs vide order dated 30.10.2003, ordered confiscation of the goods, and also imposed penalty of Rs.1,25,000/-(Rupees one lakh and twenty five thousand only)- , the Deputy Commissioner of Customs,Trichy ordered refund of Rs.3,22,383/-(Rupees three lakhs twenty two thousand and three hundred and eighty three only) to the petitioner, in view of the fact that during the adjudication proceedings, the confiscated goods were sold for a sum of Rs.11,21,075/-(Rupees Eleven lakhs twenty one thousand and seventy five only) - The goods were sold under Section 110 (ia) and (ib).This for the reason that the Deputy Commissioner also claimed customs duty of Rs.3,73,892/-(Rupees Three lakhs seventy three thousand eight hundred and ninety two only) in addition to redemption charges and penalty - The order passed by the appellate authority is in consonance with the settled law, that after the payment of redemption charges, penalty,balance sale proceeding, should have paid to the importer, ie.,what has been done by the appellate authority and upheld by the revisional authority - For the reasons stated, finding no merits, the writ Petition is ordered to be dismissed - The petitioner is directed to release the amount due to the respondent No.1 under the impugned orders, within one month of receipt of certified copy of this order - In case the payment is not released within one month, the petitioner shall be entitled to interest @ 6% p.a. on this amount due from the date of order of appellate authority till realisation, but in case the payment is made within one month as stipulated then respondent No.1 shall not be entitled to any interest as operation of impugned order was stayed by this Court.

Summary

Issues:
1. Quashing of the order passed in Revision by the Commissioner of Customs.
2. Confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty for misdeclaration.
3. Dispute over payment of customs duty and redemption charges.
4. Appeal and revision against the orders passed by the authorities.
5. Compliance with Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 1: Quashing of the order passed in Revision:
The Commissioner of Customs sought a Writ of Certiorari to quash the Revision order. The impugned order was disposed of as the issue had been previously decided in another Revisionary order.

Issue 2: Confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty:
A trader misdeclared the value of goods to evade duty, leading to confiscation and a penalty of Rs.1.25 lakhs. The Government ordered the release of goods on payment of redemption charges but upheld the penalty.

Issue 3: Dispute over payment of customs duty and redemption charges:
The appellate authority modified the order, directing the release of sale proceeds after payment of redemption charges and penalty. The authority relied on judgments stating customs duty is not payable when goods are re-exported.

Issue 4: Appeal and revision against orders:
The petitioner challenged the orders before the State Government, arguing they were non-speaking and contrary to Section 125 of the Customs Act. The revisional authority upheld the previous decision, emphasizing compliance with redemption charges and penalty.

Issue 5: Compliance with Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962:
The petitioner contended that customs duty should be payable even on sale by the department, contrary to the appellate authority's decision. However, the court found the orders in line with Section 125(2) of the Act.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the Writ Petition, ruling in favor of the respondent and directing the petitioner to release the amount due within a specified timeframe. The court held that the orders passed by the authorities were justified and compliant with the Customs Act, rejecting the petitioner's contentions.