2014 (6) TMI 511 - AT - Customs

Confiscation of goods - import of GPS and Modem - GPS receiver versus GPS Transreceiver - restricted goods - Redemption fine - Penalty - Held that - Appellate authority appears to have applied his mind to understand whether the goods imported was covered by EXIM policy of 2004-09. He has noted what that GPS trans-receiver means. He was of the view that GPS receiver is different from GPS trans-receiver. Accordingly, he held that there was licensing requirement under EXIM policy. When no licence was obtained, the goods were liable to confiscation. Law is clear that when the goods enter into India in contravention of law that becomes smuggled goods under section 2 (39) of Customs Act 1962 - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues: Classification of goods under the EXIM Policy of 2004-09, imposition of redemption fine, imposition of penalty

Classification of Goods under EXIM Policy:
The appellant argued that the goods imported were not restricted goods under the EXIM Policy of 2004-09, as they were only GPS and Modem, not GPS and trans-receiver. The Revenue, however, supported the classification. The appellate authority upheld the classification as GPS Transreceiver under CTH 85269190, distinguishing it from GPS Receiver and Differential GPS. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appellant's contention that the rules for classification under the Customs Tariff Act cannot be applied to the EXIM Policy, emphasizing the nature, use, and functions of the goods. The appellate authority's decision was based on the understanding that there was a licensing requirement under the EXIM policy for GPS trans-receivers, and since no license was obtained, the goods were liable to confiscation. The judgment emphasized that goods entering India in contravention of the law are considered smuggled goods under the Customs Act 1962.

Imposition of Redemption Fine and Penalty:
The Revenue had initially imposed a redemption fine of Rs.3,15,000 and a penalty of Rs.75,000. The appellate authority reduced these amounts to Rs.2 Lakhs and Rs.50,000, respectively. The appellant raised a new argument during the appeal, claiming that there was no technical examination of the goods by any technical institution. However, since this argument was not presented before the lower authorities, it was deemed inadmissible at that stage. The judgment concluded that the imposition of the redemption fine and penalty, as ordered by the Commissioner (Appeals), was appropriate, resulting in the dismissal of the appellant's appeal.

In summary, the judgment focused on the correct classification of the imported goods under the EXIM Policy of 2004-09, emphasizing the distinction between GPS trans-receivers and other similar devices. Additionally, it addressed the imposition of redemption fine and penalty, highlighting the importance of compliance with licensing requirements under the applicable laws.