2019 (10) TMI 456 - AT - Customs

Seizure of consignment - Baggage Rules - illegal exports or not - packet containing 193 posters of Maldives Airlines - imposition of penalty u/s 117 of CA - HELD THAT - The packet containing 193 posters of Maldives Airlines was being handed over to Rasheed who was flying to Maldives and this quantity is not a prohibited quantity and moreover the value of the same was only 19,300 - Further the learned AR did not convince me that the said baggage is not a bona fide baggage and is in violation of the Baggage Rules. He has not been able to point out which Rule has been violated in the present case - Moreover, nothing has been brought on record against the appellant so as to involve him in the illegal export. There are no justification for imposing the penalty of ₹ 5,000/- on the appellant under Section 117 of the Customs Act - penalty set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting appellant's appeal.
- Whether the seized packet can be considered as bona fide baggage.
- Imposition of penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act.

Analysis:
The case involved an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the appellant's appeal. The appellant argued that there was no justification for imposing a penalty under Section 117 of the Act as they were not involved in the illegal export of the baggage. The main issue revolved around whether the seized packet, containing 193 posters bound for Maldives, could be considered bona fide baggage. The appellant contended that the posters were requested to be carried by a passenger for a friend and did not violate any Customs Act or Baggage Rules. The appellant emphasized that the posters were not prohibited or restricted items and were of low value, not constituting a trade quantity.

During the proceedings, both parties presented their arguments. The appellant maintained that the seized packet was legitimate baggage, while the learned Assistant Commissioner defended the impugned order. After considering the submissions and examining the material on record, the Judicial Member found that the packet of posters, handed over to a passenger bound for Maldives, did not violate any rules. The Judicial Member noted that the quantity and value of the posters were not prohibited, and the appellant was not implicated in any illegal export activities. Consequently, the Judicial Member concluded that there was no justification for imposing a penalty of ?5,000 on the appellant under Section 117 of the Customs Act. Therefore, the penalty was set aside, and the appeal of the appellant was allowed.

In the final order pronounced on 04/09/2019, the Judicial Member ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that the seized packet of posters was indeed bona fide baggage and did not warrant the imposition of a penalty under the Customs Act.