2013 (12) TMI 1351 - AT - Customs

Waiver of pre-deposit of penalty - Misdeclaration of goods - Held that - applicant in his statement dated 24.09.2009 recorded under Sec.108 of the Customs Act admitted that he had earlier passed several overvalued consignments to various exporters on monetary consideration. Further we find that one Smt. Kirti Rathod, Preventive Officer of Customs who examined the shipping bills in question and found that the declared value was on higher side and thereafter she personally brought this fact to the notice of the applicant and the applicant informed her that valuation is not her responsibility and that it is the work of the superintendent and field officer. In these circumstances, we find that the applicant has not made out a prima case for total waiver of the penalties - Conditional stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
Waiver of pre-deposit of penalty in two appeal cases.

Analysis:
In the present case, the applicant, a Superintendent in the Customs Department, filed appeals seeking waiver of pre-deposit of penalties amounting to Rs. 2.5 lakhs and Rs. 5 lakhs. The applicant was found to have granted let export orders for consignments after receiving monetary gratification. An amount of Rs. 57 lakhs was recovered from the applicant's residential premises during investigation. The Commissioner (Appeals) had directed the applicant to deposit 50% of the penalties for hearing the appeals, which the applicant failed to comply with, leading to the dismissal of the appeals.

The contention raised by the applicant was that the Commissioner (Appeals) should have decided the appeals on merits without requiring any pre-deposit, as the applicant claimed to have not committed any wrongdoing while performing official duties. On the other hand, the Revenue argued that the applicant, by issuing let export orders after receiving gratification, facilitated overvaluation of goods for undue export benefits, making the applicant liable for penalties.

The Tribunal observed that the applicant had indeed issued let export orders for mis-declared goods, which were found to be overvalued for obtaining undue export benefits. Additionally, the applicant had admitted to passing overvalued consignments to exporters in exchange for monetary consideration. The Preventive Officer of Customs had also brought to the applicant's attention the overvaluation of goods, to which the applicant shifted responsibility to other officers.

Based on these findings, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not established a prima facie case for a total waiver of penalties. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit 50% of the penalty amount in each case within eight weeks, with the remaining penalty amount being waived upon such deposit. The recovery of the waived amount was stayed during the pendency of the appeals, with a compliance report due by a specified date for further proceedings.

In conclusion, subject to compliance with the deposit requirement, the appeals were to be listed for hearing, allowing the legal process to proceed further in the matter.