2015 (11) TMI 1397 - AT - Customs

Valuation - import of old and used monitors - restricted items - Confiscation of goods - Imposition of redemption fine and penalty - Misdeclaration of goods - Held that - As per the facts of the case, the appellant has mis-declared the description of the goods and on examination; the imported monitors were found to be used and old. As per the Exim Policy import of old and used items can be made only on the import licence. The appellant fail to comply this requirement of the policy, therefore the goods were rightly confiscated. However, we find that the value of the goods declared and enhanced by the Customs Authority is not much different. The enhancement is only to the tune of ₹ 94,682/- which is not significant. Redemption fine and penalty is reduced - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Reduction of penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.
2. Reduction of redemption fine imposed by the lower authority.
3. Mis-declaration of imported goods and compliance with Exim Policy.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Reduction of Penalty
The appeal challenged the Order-in-Original that enhanced the total value of imported goods, resulting in the imposition of a penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The adjudicating authority initially imposed a penalty of &8377; 1,20,000/-, which was reduced by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) to &8377; 60,000/-. The appellant contested the penalty, arguing that the enhancement in value was not substantial, and thus, the penalty was on the higher side. The Tribunal acknowledged the misdeclaration of goods by the appellant but found the penalty excessive. Consequently, the penalty was further reduced to &8377; 25,000/-.

Issue 2: Reduction of Redemption Fine
The adjudication order also included a redemption fine of &8377; 5,00,000/- under Section 125(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) reduced this redemption fine to &8377; 2,50,000/-. The appellant contested the imposition of the redemption fine, arguing that the value enhancement was minor, and the fine was unreasonably high. The Tribunal agreed that the redemption fine was excessive given the circumstances and reduced it further to &8377; 1,00,000/-.

Issue 3: Mis-declaration and Compliance
The case involved the misdeclaration of imported goods by the appellant, specifically old and used monitors without the required import license as per the Exim Policy. The Customs Officers observed the discrepancy and issued a show cause notice proposing confiscation of goods and penalties under various sections of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal acknowledged the misdeclaration but noted that the value enhancement was not significant. Considering the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal found the redemption fine and penalty imposed by the Ld. Commissioner to be on the higher side and reduced them accordingly.

In conclusion, the appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal reducing the redemption fine to &8377; 1,00,000/- and the penalty to &8377; 25,000/- based on the minor valuation discrepancy and the overall circumstances of the case.