9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 306 - AT - CustomsQuantum of redemption fine and penalty - import of old and used copier machines of Canon brand without license - confiscation - Held that - The Commissioner while imposing the fine and penalty, has taken notice of the order in the case of COMMR. OF CUSTOMS, TUTICORIN Versus SAI COPIERS 2008 (1) TMI 402 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS , where it was held that The fixation of the quantum of redemption is an exercise of discretionary jurisdiction of the authorities under the Customs Act. The Court can interfere only in the circumstances in which it was demonstrated before it that the order of the Tribunal is thoroughly arbitrary, whimsical and resulting in miscarriage of justice - there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs imposing the redemption of fine of ₹ 9,00,000/- and a penalty of ₹ 2,00,000/- - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
Issues: Appeal against imposition of fine and penalty under Customs Act, 1962.
Analysis: 1. Imposition of Redemption Fine and Penalty: The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner Customs imposing a redemption fine of ?9,00,000 and a penalty of ?2,00,000 on the importer for clearance of old copier machines. The Commissioner confiscated the goods under section 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962 and allowed redemption on payment of the fine. The Revenue contended that the fine and penalty were too low compared to the value of the goods and policy violation. 2. Contentions of the Parties: The Revenue argued that the fine and penalty should have been equal to the value of the goods due to policy violation. On the other hand, the Counsel for the Assessee defended the order, stating that the Commissioner considered various appellate orders reducing fines and penalties to 10% and 5%. The Counsel also mentioned the judgments of the Madras High Court and the High Court of Kerala, which were considered by the Commissioner while imposing the fine and penalty. 3. Judgment: After hearing both parties, the Judicial Member found no fault in the Commissioner's order imposing the redemption fine and penalty. The Commissioner's decision was upheld based on the consideration of the judgments from the Madras High Court and the High Court of Kerala. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, affirming the imposition of the fine and penalty as per the original order dated 23.10.2009. The judgment was pronounced on 14/09/2017 in open court.
|
