9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (6) TMI 1163 - AT - CustomsPermission to appellant to reexport the jewellery since the consignee had not cleared the consignment from the Customs - applicant submits that if the jewellery is not reexported immediately the designs get outdated resulting in huge pecuniary loss - HELD THAT - The Final order has only set aside the penalties under Section 112, 114 and 114AA. It is undisputed that the jewellery was sent by the appellant to M/s Vee Ess Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Noida for re-conditioning who had not cleared it from the Customs. No redemption fine has been imposed upon the applicant nor has any notice been issued to the applicant for confiscation of the jewellery. If Revenue succeeds in its appeal before the Hon ble High Court, the penalties imposed upon the applicant may be restored. The applicant is directed to submit a bank guarantee for Rs. 10 lakhs in favour of the Commissioner of Customs (Export), Air Cargo Complex, New Delhi with a copy of this Order and keep the Bank Guarantee alive till the disposal of the appeal filed by the Department before the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad - application disposed off.
Issues:
1. Compliance with Final Order directing reexport of gold jewellery. 2. Imposition of penalties under Customs Act, 1962. 3. Pending Customs Appeals and stay applications before High Court. Analysis: Issue 1: Compliance with Final Order The applicant sought compliance with Final Order directing reexport of gold jewellery seized by DRI. The Final Order set aside penalties under Sections 112, 114, and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, imposed by the Commissioner of Customs. It was held that the jewellery, exported to M/s Vee Ess Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., remained under the ownership of the appellant as the consignee did not clear it. The Tribunal directed Customs Authorities to allow reexport within two months. The applicant prayed for immediate reexport due to potential pecuniary loss from outdated designs. Issue 2: Imposition of Penalties The DRI seized the jewellery at the Airport as the consignee did not file a Bill of Entry. The Commissioner imposed penalties without proposing confiscation or redemption fine. However, the Final Order set aside these penalties, emphasizing that the consignee's failure to clear the goods entitled the appellant to reexport the jewellery. The Tribunal noted the pending Customs Appeals filed by Revenue before the High Court, which could potentially reinstate the penalties if successful. Issue 3: Pending Appeals and Stay Applications Revenue filed Customs Appeals and stay applications against the Final Order before the High Court. The Department opposed immediate compliance with the Final Order, citing the pending appeals. The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of reinstating penalties if Revenue succeeds in its appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the applicant to submit a bank guarantee for Rs. 10 lakhs to permit reexport, subject to the High Court's decision. In conclusion, the Tribunal directed compliance with the Final Order for reexport of jewellery while considering the pending appeals and potential reinstatement of penalties. The applicant was required to submit a bank guarantee to ensure compliance pending the High Court's decision.
|
