Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2007 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2007 (9) TMI 145 - AT - Customs


Issues: Penalty for bringing a barge into Indian Customs waters without declaration in the Import Manifest.

Analysis:
1. The appeal stemmed from an order imposing a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 for bringing a barge into Indian Customs waters without declaring it in the Import Manifest. The Master of the vessel admitted the mistake, citing lack of awareness of Indian rules due to being a first-time visitor. The appellants contended that it was a bona fide mistake with no intention to evade the law.

2. Initially adjudicated, the matter was remanded for further consideration, allowing the appellants to cross-examine witnesses. The Commissioner noted the Master's admissions regarding the barge's entry into Indian waters. The appellants claimed the entry was a bona fide mistake and done on Port Control Officials' instructions, a defense not accepted by the adjudicating authority, resulting in the penalty on the Master of the vessel.

3. The Counsel argued against the penalty, citing precedents where penalties were not imposed for venial breaches. Referring to relevant cases, including one where a penalty was set aside due to lack of intent to sell goods in the local market, the Counsel contended that penalties were not applicable for technical or venial breaches of the law.

4. The Department defended the penalty, emphasizing the obligation to declare the barge in the vessel's Manifest. The defense of not understanding English and following Port Control Officials' instructions was rejected, asserting that violating Customs law by not declaring the barge warranted the penalty.

5. The Commissioner rejected the appellants' claim of a bona fide mistake but acknowledged their lack of understanding of regulations, leading to no confiscation of the vessel or redemption fine. Despite accepting the mistake for not imposing further penalties, the Commissioner upheld the penalty for violating Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. However, considering the precedents and the appellants' bona fide grounds, the penalty on the Master of the vessel was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates