2021 (3) TMI 1167 - AT - Customs

Levy of penal charges for late presentation of Bill-of-Entry - HELD THAT - This has considered similar issue in the case of M/S. BLUELEAF TRADING COMPANY VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF G.S.T. CENTRAL EXCISE 2019 (5) TMI 672 - CESTAT CHENNAI where it was held that Appellant is clearly not the first importer, there is request for amendment in IGM on record, allowed by the Revenue after collecting requisite fees and these are clearly post-import developments. The subsequent developments, were perhaps necessitated because of the goods being perishable. Clearly, no mala fide is found in the above developments by the Revenue and therefore, it can be safely assumed that the Revenue was otherwise satisfied with sufficient cause . Demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Appeal against penal charges for late presentation of Bill-of-Entry.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Facts of the Case: The appellant appealed against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Tiruchirappalli. The case involved a vessel carrying Heavy Melting Scrap that arrived at Tuticorin Port and was sold on high sea sales basis. The appellant purchased the import consignment but faced delays due to financial issues and non-receipt of original documents.

2. Grounds of Appeal: The appellant challenged the penal charges imposed for the late presentation of the Bill-of-Entry. The Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals) rejected the appeal, leading to the appellant filing the present appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai.

3. Arguments: The appellant's advocate cited precedents where similar late fees were deleted by the CESTAT, emphasizing that the appellant was not the first importer but a subsequent purchaser who stepped in due to unforeseen circumstances. The Authorized Representative for the Revenue supported the lower authorities' findings.

4. Decision: The Member (Judicial) of the CESTAT Chennai referred to previous cases where late fees were deleted, highlighting that the appellant had a valid cause for the delay and was not the initial importer. The order-in-appeal was deemed unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed with consequential reliefs, if any, as per law.

5. Conclusion: The impugned order imposing penal charges for late presentation of the Bill-of-Entry was set aside by the CESTAT Chennai, providing relief to the appellant based on the specific circumstances of the case and established legal principles.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 26.03.2021)