2017 (9) TMI 439 - AT - Customs

Confiscation - undeclared third country origin goods listed in part A-1 34, 39, 445/- were brought into India in contravention of the provisions of N/N. 9/96-CUS(NT) dated 22.01.96 issued under Section of the Customs Act read with Section 3 of Foreign Trade (Development 2, 13, 522/- used for concealment of the smuggled TCO goods were liable to confiscation at the same were used for concealing the TCO goods that the undeclared Nepalese garments personal effects and miscellaneous goods (listed in part A2 D 33, 000/- the declared garments valued at 32, 74, 945/- at the Annexure-A1 to Panchnama and I hold that the confiscation is bad and set aside the same along with redemption fine - So far the handicrafts goods at Annexure-B to the inventory admittedly there is no evidence of such goods being of third country origin and there are also the declared goods as per the Bill of Entry valued at 2, 13, 522/- and accordingly the confiscation set aside. So far the undeclared goods being personal effects valued at 4700/- admittedly belonging to R.C. Sharma is concerned the confiscation set aside in view of the admission by the said R.C. Sharma being an employee of the Government of India and the facts stated by him have not been found to be untrue and further the goods were of very small value and admittedly personal effects. So far the goods at Annexure-E to the Panchnama being undeclared handicrafts value at 1, 45, 200/- is concerned. these goods are liable to confiscation but the appellant-exporter Smt. Kamla Shreshta of M/s Pramila Handicrafts is entitled to redemption on payment of redemption fine 25, 000/-. So far the two trucks are concerned there is no finding save and except presumptions that the owners of the said trucks and its staff being drivers and cleaners were knowingly transporting any contraband goods. In this view of the matter confiscation and redemption fine set aside. So far the penalty imposed u/s 112 of the Act is concerned considering the overall facts and circumstances and my findings hereinabove the penalty imposed on Smt. Kamla Shreshta reduced from 25, 000/- to 15, 000/- on Shri D.D. Pant from 30, 000/- to 5, 000/-. Further reduce the penalty on Shri Hari Kumar Thakuri from 20, 000/- to 5000/- - So far the other appellants and/or parties are concerned the penalties imposed on them fully set aside. Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Confiscation of undeclared third country origin (TCO) goods.
2. Confiscation of declared Nepalese handicrafts and garments.
3. Confiscation of personal effects and miscellaneous goods.
4. Confiscation of trucks used for transportation.
5. Imposition of penalties on various parties involved.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Confiscation of Undeclared Third Country Origin (TCO) Goods:
The primary issue concerns the confiscation of undeclared TCO goods found beneath declared Nepalese handicrafts in two intercepted trucks. The goods were valued at ?34,39,445/- and were alleged to be in contravention of Notification No.9/96-CUS(NT) dated 22.01.96 under Section 11 of the Customs Act, 1962, read with Section 3 of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992. The Tribunal found no conclusive evidence that the garments were of third country origin, and thus, set aside the confiscation and redemption fine for these goods.

2. Confiscation of Declared Nepalese Handicrafts and Garments:
The declared Nepalese handicrafts and garments, valued at ?2,13,522/-, were used for concealing the undeclared TCO goods. The Tribunal found no evidence suggesting these goods were of third country origin and set aside their confiscation.

3. Confiscation of Personal Effects and Miscellaneous Goods:
The personal effects and miscellaneous goods, including undeclared Nepalese jackets and other items, were also confiscated. The Tribunal upheld the absolute confiscation of some goods like the water tube boiler and stone grinder, as no one claimed them. However, it set aside the confiscation of personal effects valued at ?4,700/- belonging to R.C. Sharma, finding his statements credible. For undeclared handicrafts valued at ?1,45,200/-, the Tribunal allowed redemption on payment of a fine of ?25,000/-.

4. Confiscation of Trucks Used for Transportation:
The trucks used for transporting the goods were also confiscated. The Tribunal found no evidence that the truck owners or their staff knowingly transported contraband goods. Therefore, it set aside the confiscation and redemption fine imposed on the trucks.

5. Imposition of Penalties on Various Parties Involved:
Penalties were imposed on several individuals under Section 112 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal reduced the penalties on Smt. Kamla Shreshta from ?25,000/- to ?15,000/-, on Shri D.D. Pant from ?30,000/- to ?5,000/-, and on Shri Hari Kumar Thakuri from ?20,000/- to ?5,000/-. Penalties on other appellants were fully set aside.

Conclusion:
The appeals were allowed in part, with the Tribunal setting aside the confiscation of most goods and trucks, reducing penalties on key individuals, and allowing redemption of certain goods on payment of fines. The appellants were entitled to consequential benefits in accordance with the law.