2016 (7) TMI 145 - CGOVT - Customs

Import of electronic goods & cigarettes in a baggage - attempt to walk through green channel without declaring the goods - habitual offender - confiscation and redemption fine - Held that - Government opines that any oral submission made before the adjudicating authority will be a material piece of evidence. In View of the specific admission made by the applicant before the adjudicating authority, Government is inclined to hold that the applicant attempted to walk through green channel without declaring the impugned goods that too in commercial quantity. The impugned electronic goods had been rightly confiscated by the adjudicating authority under Section Ill(d), (l), (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and allowing them on payment of redemption fine which also renders the applicant liable for imposition of penalty under Section 112(a) of the Act, ibid. He is also a habitual offender. Government therefore, finds no merit in the plea of the applicant to set aside the redemption fine and personal penalty. - Decided against the applicant.

Summary

Issues:
Violation of Customs Act by not declaring goods upon arrival at the airport, Confiscation of goods under relevant sections, Imposition of penalty and fine, Appeal rejection by Commissioner (Appeals), Revision application filed before Central Government

Analysis:
The case involves the violation of the Customs Act by an individual who arrived at Chennai Airport from Colombo without declaring electronic goods valued at Rs. 2,98,500. The individual attempted to walk through the green channel without declaring the goods as required by law. The adjudicating authority confiscated the goods under various sections of the Customs Act and the Foreign Trade Act, offering the option to redeem the goods by paying a fine of Rs. 1,50,000. Additionally, a penalty of Rs. 30,000 was imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act.

The individual filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), which was rejected for being devoid of merit. Subsequently, a Revision Application was filed before the Central Government challenging the impugned Order-in-Appeal. The grounds for revision included arguments related to the legality of the orders, the true declaration made by the individual, the purpose of bringing the goods, and the failure to consider relevant points by the authorities.

The Central Government carefully reviewed the case records, written submissions, and the impugned orders. It was observed that the individual had not declared the goods as required under the Customs Act and was found carrying electronic goods and branded cigarettes in commercial quantity. The goods were deemed to be in violation of various provisions of the Acts, leading to their confiscation and the imposition of a fine and penalty.

The government noted that the individual had attempted to walk through the green channel without declaring the goods, as admitted during a personal hearing. This admission was considered voluntary and a material piece of evidence. The government found that the individual contravened the provisions of the Acts and was rightfully subjected to the confiscation of goods, fine, and penalty.

Moreover, it was established that the individual had a history of similar offenses, further diminishing the merit of the plea to set aside the redemption fine and personal penalty. Consequently, the Central Government upheld the impugned Order-in-Appeal and rejected the Revision Application as devoid of merits.