2018 (6) TMI 817 - AT - Customs

Smuggling - eletronic goods - prohibited goods - personal baggage or not? - goods imported in Commercial Quantity - Baggage Rules - Absolute Confiscation - Penalty - Held that - There can be no doubt that the quantity of 1100 numbers of 1 GB RAMs 201 numbers of 2GB RAMs 50, 227 numbers of Kingston 2 GB SD Micro Memory cards and 7097 numbers of PQ1 2 GB SD memory cards can by any stretch of imagination be considered as a normal personal baggage brought by a passenger into India - such quantities imported by the passenger can have only to be treated as trade quantities hence the impugned goods cannot be considered as a bonafide passenger baggage. These goods are listed in the notified goods for the purpose of section 123 of Customs Act 1962 hence they would take on the colour of prohibited goods. Absolute Confiscation upheld - penalty upheld - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of electronic goods under Customs Act, 1962.
2. Redemption of confiscated goods.
3. Legal status of the goods as bonafide passenger baggage.
4. Imposition of penalty under Section 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962.

Confiscation of Electronic Goods under Customs Act, 1962:
The case involved the confiscation of electronic goods from an individual arriving in India. The appellant was found in possession of a significant quantity of electronic items without proper documentation upon arrival. The officers valued the goods based on NIDB data and seized them under the Customs Act, 1962. The original authority ordered absolute confiscation of the goods valued at &8377;1,40,19,940 and imposed a penalty of &8377;15 lakhs. The appellant challenged this decision before the Tribunal.

Redemption of Confiscated Goods:
The appellant argued that the goods were not prohibited and should be allowed redemption or re-export. The appellant cited a previous case where redemption was granted for similar goods. However, the adjudicating authority denied the request for re-export in this case. The appellant sought redemption of the confiscated goods on payment of a redemption fine.

Legal Status of Goods as Bonafide Passenger Baggage:
The Tribunal determined that the quantity and nature of the electronic goods possessed by the appellant were not typical of personal baggage but resembled commercial imports. The goods were considered trade quantities and listed as prohibited goods under the Customs Act, 1962. Referring to a previous case, the Tribunal upheld the decision of absolute confiscation based on the nature of the goods and their import status.

Imposition of Penalty under Section 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962:
After analyzing the arguments from both sides, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the order of absolute confiscation and imposition of the penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal upheld the original authority's decision, stating that the confiscated goods were rightly valued and the penalty was justified. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the impugned order was upheld.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues of confiscation, redemption, legal status of goods, and penalty imposition under the Customs Act, 1962, providing a comprehensive overview of the Tribunal's decision in the case.