2007 (8) TMI 185 - HC - Customs

Sale of seized vehicle by Dept. in auction, during pendency of appeal Tribunal set aside the confiscation order by allowing benefit of Not. 258/90 Again Tribunal entitled the importer, the value of car as fixed in seizure memo i.e. 15 lac minus redemption fine 2.20 lac Order of Tribunal upheld

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Customs Act, 1962 regarding deduction of Redemption Fine only and not the amount of duty, penalty, and other charges.
2. Application of exemption of duty of custom for a motor car imported by an Indian repatriate from Iraq or Kuwait.
3. Confiscation of the car and penalty imposition based on misdeclaration by the importer.
4. Tribunal's decision on the fulfillment of conditions under the notification dated 23-10-1990 and registration of the vehicle in the importer's name.
5. Tribunal's rejection of expert opinion and granting benefit of notification dated 23-10-1990 to the importer.
6. Adjudicating Authority's option for the importer to redeem the impounded vehicle.
7. Tribunal's direction to return the value of the car to the importer after deduction of the redemption fine.
8. Upholding of Tribunal's order by the High Court and directing the revenue to make payment to the importer with interest.

Analysis:
1. The appeal involved the question of whether the Tribunal was justified in allowing deduction of Redemption Fine only and not the amount of duty, penalty, and other charges under Sections 111 and 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's decision and directing the revenue to make payment to the importer with interest.

2. The case revolved around the exemption of duty of custom for a motor car imported by an Indian repatriate from Iraq or Kuwait under a specific notification. The importer claimed exemption under this notification, leading to the confiscation of the car and imposition of a penalty by the revenue authorities based on alleged misdeclaration.

3. The Collector of Customs adjudicated the matter, denying the benefit of the notification and ordering confiscation of the car along with a penalty. This decision was challenged by the importer, leading to a series of appeals and orders by the Tribunal and the Adjudicating Authority.

4. The Tribunal found that the importer fulfilled the conditions of the notification and that the vehicle was registered in the importer's name, contrary to the department's allegations. The Tribunal disregarded an expert opinion and granted the importer the benefit of the notification issued on humanitarian grounds.

5. The Tribunal set aside the order of absolute confiscation of the vehicle, allowing the importer to redeem the impounded vehicle. The penalty imposed on the importer was also set aside based on the Tribunal's findings regarding the notification and the importer's compliance with its conditions.

6. The Adjudicating Authority granted the importer the option to redeem the impounded vehicle by paying a redemption fine, which was later challenged by the importer before the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the customs authorities to return the value of the car to the importer after deducting the redemption fine.

7. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the correctness of the view taken by the Tribunal based on previous judgments. The Court rejected the revenue's arguments and confirmed that the importer was entitled to the return of the vehicle after deduction of the redemption fine.

8. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upheld the Tribunal's order, and directed the revenue to make payment to the importer within a specified period along with interest. The Court found no substantive question of law for determination and enforced the payment to the importer as per the Tribunal's decision.

← Previous Next →