2018 (8) TMI 369 - AT - Customs

Penalties - Detention of goods with vehicle - carrying of scraps - carrying of two consignment notes - detention of truck on the ground that these goods were of the foreign origin - Held that - The Adjudication Order suffers from inherent deficiency - It is difficult to understand that on what grounds, the Adjudicating Authority has arrived at the conclusion that the goods are of Bangladesh Origin whereas the report sent by their own Asstt. Commissioner states that it is not possible to substantially justify the origin of these scraps to be of Bangladesh origin - the letter of the Tripura Metal Scraps Merchant Association also states that the scraps, are locally produced scraps from different small hawkers, who collect them from different households of Tripura. Carrying of two consignment notes - Held that - It is not clear from the investigation report that these consignment notes were of the same date. Possibly the driver of the truck has forgotten to unload the consignments of the previous journey, which has not been verified by the department. The adjudicating authority has not arrived at the correct conclusion by holding that the scraps are of Bangladesh origin - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues involved:
Appeal restoration due to non-prosecution, imposition of penalties in customs case, origin of transported goods, validity of adjudication order.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a Misc. Application filed for the restoration of an appeal that was dismissed for non-prosecution. The appellant, under medical treatment, failed to attend the hearing due to traveling for treatment purposes. The application was allowed, and the appeal was restored for final disposal with the consent of both parties.

The main appeal challenges penalties imposed in a customs case involving the transportation of scraps from Agartala to Kolkata. The issue revolves around the origin of the goods, suspected to be of foreign origin, leading to interception and seizure by the Preventive team. The adjudication order, subject to appeal, imposed penalties based on the suspicion of the goods being of Bangladesh origin.

During the hearing, the appellant contested the order, arguing that the scraps were locally collected and purchased from Tripura, not of Bangladesh origin. The Assistant Commissioner's report was inconclusive regarding the source of goods, raising doubts about the adjudicating authority's conclusion based on presumption.

On the contrary, the Revenue supported the adjudication order citing reasons such as defaced truck number plate, inconclusive report, and discrepancies in consignment notes as evidence of the goods' foreign origin. However, the Tribunal found deficiencies in the adjudication order, questioning the basis for concluding the goods were of Bangladesh origin, especially when the Assistant Commissioner's report did not substantiate this claim.

Further scrutiny revealed inconsistencies in the investigation, including unclear details about the consignment notes and statements from the Tripura Metal Scraps Merchant Association supporting the local origin of the scraps. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the adjudication order, ruling in favor of the appellant due to the lack of sufficient evidence supporting the claim of the goods being of Bangladesh origin.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing the inadequacy of the adjudicating authority's reasoning and the need to overturn the decision based on the available evidence supporting the local origin of the transported scraps.