Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2018 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (3) TMI 1441 - AT - CustomsMis-declaration of imported goods - pesticides/ insecticides /fungicides - Held that - it appears that undoubtedly the appellant has mis-declared the imported goods as limestone powder instead of pesticides/ insecticides/ fungicides which attract higher rate of duty. The appellant was well aware about the contents of the container, because one of the container was already released. It appears that it is first offence of the appellant and he accepted his guilt before the lower authorities - Quantum of penalty reduced. Appeal allowed in part.
Issues: Mis-declaration of imported goods leading to penalty imposition.
Analysis: The appeal was filed against Order-in-Original No.11/2017 dated 31.8.17, concerning mis-declaration of imported goods. The appellant, a proprietor of M/s. Kalyan Enterprises, imported consignments from China, declaring the goods as 'Limestone powder,' which were actually high-value pesticides/insecticides/fungicides attracting a higher duty. A penalty of ?10 lakh was imposed on the appellant, Shri Ankit Pandey, along with another noticee, Shri Arun Yadav. The appellant contended that the China buyer sent the wrong goods, while they imported limestone powder. The appellant's counsel argued for leniency due to it being the first offense and claimed innocence, stating that the work was done on behalf of Shri Arun Yadav. However, the Department's counsel asserted that the appellant knowingly imported the pesticides/insecticides. The Tribunal found that the appellant mis-declared the goods and was aware of the contents, leading to penal action. Despite reducing the penalty to ?6,00,000, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order, holding the appellant guilty of mis-declaration but considering the circumstances of the first offense and acceptance of guilt. In conclusion, the appeal was partially allowed, with the penalty amount reduced to ?6,00,000, providing relief to the appellant for the balance.
|