2013 (10) TMI 852 - AT - Customs

Penalty - Confiscation of goods - Held that - The goods were re-examined at the request of the appellant and it was found that the consignment consisted of 10% of the sawn woods. The appellant has not contested this examination report since they waived the show-cause notice and also did not appear for personal hearing before the assessing authority. In other words, they had agreed with the examination report conducted in their presence under the supervision of Assistant Commissioner (Docks). If that be so, the appellant cannot at the appellate stage dispute the examination report. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order in confirming the duty demand on 10% of the consignment at the rate applicable to the sawn woods by classifying them under CTH 4407.29. It is not in dispute that the consignment consisted of roughly squared sawn woods logs as declared by the appellant to the extent of 90% of the consignment and only 10% of the goods were found to be sawn wood - there was no deliberate mis-declaration on the part of the appellant with intent to evade Customs duty. Therefore, confiscation was not warranted and consequently imposition of fine and penalty was also not warranted. Accordingly, we set aside the fine and penalty imposed on the appellant while upholding the confirmation of duty demand - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of imported goods under CTH heading, Confiscation of goods, Imposition of fine and penalty.

Classification of Imported Goods:
The appellant imported goods declared as "Teak Wood roughly squared" seeking classification under CTH 4403. However, upon examination, it was reported that the goods were in "Sawn" form classifiable under CTH heading 4407.99. The examination revealed that 10% of the goods were sawn wood, leading to a dispute regarding the correct classification for duty calculation. The appellant waived their right to show-cause notice and personal hearing, agreeing with the examination report conducted in their presence. Consequently, the duty demand on 10% of the consignment as sawn woods under CTH 4407.29 was upheld by the Tribunal.

Confiscation of Goods and Imposition of Fine and Penalty:
The adjudicating authority had ordered confiscation of the sawn woods valued at Rs. 1,01,862 under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, with an option to redeem upon payment of a fine of Rs. 35,000. Additionally, a penalty of Rs. 5,000 was imposed on the appellant. The appellant contested these penalties, arguing that there was no deliberate mis-declaration, as 90% of the consignment consisted of the declared goods. The Tribunal agreed, finding no intent to evade customs duty. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the fine and penalty while upholding the duty demand on the 10% of the consignment classified as sawn woods. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.