2011 (9) TMI 665 - HC - Customs

Penalty - misdescription of the goods imported - Held That - Duty and penalty is paid even before the issue of Show Cause Notice and the said fact is informed to the proper officer thus he shall not initiate any proceedings to recover the duty and interest, much leas for imposition of penalty. Therefore, the order imposing penalty is illegal.

Summary

Issues:
- Challenge to order passed by Tribunal regarding imposition of penalty and interest when duty is paid before the issue of Show Cause Notice.

Analysis:
The High Court of Karnataka heard an appeal filed by the Revenue challenging a Tribunal's order. The Tribunal had ruled that if duty is paid before the issuance of a Show Cause Notice, the imposition of penalty and interest is not justified. The case involved the Assessee who, upon noticing misdescription of imported goods, promptly paid the duty and interest upon request for waiver of notice. The Adjudicating Authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lac despite the Assessee admitting liability. The Tribunal, citing Supreme Court judgments, set aside the penalty order, leading to the Revenue's appeal. The Court noted the insertion of Sub-section (2B) to Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, allowing payment of duty or interest before notice issuance, preventing subsequent recovery proceedings. Consequently, the Court found the penalty imposition illegal and upheld the Tribunal's decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The judgment favored the Assessee over the Revenue, emphasizing the legality of penalty imposition in such circumstances.

In conclusion, the Court's detailed analysis highlighted the procedural aspects of duty payment, notice issuance, and penalty imposition under the Customs Act, 1962. The judgment clarified that once duty and penalty are paid before a Show Cause Notice, any subsequent penalty imposition becomes illegal. The Court emphasized the importance of informing the proper officer of such payments to prevent further recovery proceedings. By upholding the Tribunal's decision, the Court favored the Assessee, emphasizing the legal provisions that safeguard against unjust penalty imposition in cases where duty is paid before notice issuance. The judgment's comprehensive analysis provided clarity on the legal principles governing penalty imposition in customs cases, ensuring fairness and adherence to statutory provisions.