2016 (4) TMI 719 - AT - Customs

Claim of Notification benefit - Bill of Entry filed inadvertently taking the benefit of Notification No. 6/02-CE dated 01.03.2002 - Revenue contended that goods came with inbuilt machine which should not enjoy the notification benefit - Held that - in view of the detailed examination done by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), and being guided by the Apex Court judgment in the case of CC (Prev.), Mumbai Vs. M. Ambalal & Co. 2010 (12) TMI 16 - Supreme court of India , laying down the ratio that interpretation of law should be made to suppress the mischief and to curb ills of mis-declaration, we are in full agreement with ld. Commissioner (Appeals) that right of claim to the notification benefit is extinguished when the declaration was found to be false and deliberate mis-declaration causing revenue loss was patent. - Decided against the appellant

Summary

Issues: Mis-declaration of goods for benefit of notification leading to imposition of redemption fine and penalty under Customs Act, 1962.

The judgment deals with an appeal where the appellant filed a Bill of Entry under Notification No. 6/02-CE dated 01.03.2002, claiming benefits inadvertently. The appellant argued against the imposition of a redemption fine of Rs. 1,00,000 and a penalty of Rs. 50,000 under Sections 125 and 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, respectively. The Revenue contended that the goods had an inbuilt machine, making them ineligible for the notification benefit, and supported the orders passed by the authorities below.

The Tribunal considered both sides and examined the records. The Commissioner (Appeals) had detailed how the goods were examined upon arrival at the Indian port, concluding that the declaration was not inadvertent but made to abuse the notification benefit. The Commissioner found the appellant's contention regarding the production of catalogue and literature baseless due to their absence, indicating intentional mis-declaration. Referring to the Apex Court judgment in CC (Prev.), Mumbai Vs. M. Ambalal & Co., the Tribunal agreed with the Commissioner that mis-declaration extinguished the right to claim notification benefits, especially when deliberate mis-declaration causing revenue loss was evident. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed based on the detailed examination and legal principles outlined.

The judgment emphasizes the importance of accurate declarations in customs matters, highlighting that intentional mis-declaration can lead to the loss of benefits and imposition of fines and penalties under the Customs Act, 1962. The decision underscores the need for compliance with customs regulations and the consequences of attempting to abuse notification benefits through false declarations.