2022 (12) TMI 151 - AT - Customs

Levy of redemption fine and penalty - misdeclaration of quantity and value of imported Polished Granite Slabs - appellant have declared 465.000sqm as against the actual quantity of 520.752sqm - HELD THAT - As per Public Notice No. 17/2010 dated 29.06.2010, it is absolutely clear that even if variation is up to 5% or more than 5%, value of the excess weight has to be added in the bills of entry and duty shall be recovered. In case of variation is above 5% not only value shall be added but the same will be adjudicated with redemption fine and penalty. Therefore, both the impugned orders were passed in accordance with the Public Notice 17/2010 dated 29.06.2010. The judgments relied upon by the appellant in GE INDIA INDUSTRIAL PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI 2009 (9) TMI 808 - CESTAT CHENNAI and GM EXPORTS VERSUS COMMR. OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE 2008 (2) TMI 691 - CESTAT, BANGALORE are on different facts therefore same are not applicable in the present case. There are no infirmity in the impugned orders hence the same are upheld and appeals are dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Challenge of imposition of redemption fine and penalty under Sections 125 and 112A of the Customs Act, 1962 for mis-declaration of quantity and value of imported Polished Granite Slabs; Appeal against enhancement of value due to excess quantity found during examination.

Analysis:
1. Challenge of Imposition of Redemption Fine and Penalty (Appeal No. C/90/2012):
- The appellant contested the imposition of a redemption fine of Rs. 30,000 and a penalty of Rs. 15,000 under Sections 125 and 112A of the Customs Act, 1962, respectively, for mis-declaring the quantity and value of imported Polished Granite Slabs. The discrepancy arose as the declared quantity was 465.000 sqm, whereas the actual quantity was 520.752 sqm, resulting in an excess quantity of 55.752 sqm valued at Rs. 75,265.
- The appellant argued that the excess was marginal, within permissible error margins, and common in trade practices for natural mined products like Polished Granite Slabs. They contended that the value is based on the chargeable weight of the slab, not the measured quantity. The appellant cited various legal precedents to support their argument.
- The Assistant Commissioner for the Revenue maintained that the excess quantity warranted the imposition of fines and penalties, as the discrepancy exceeded permissible limits. The Commissioner's decision was based on the misdeclaration of quantity and value of the goods.

2. Challenge of Value Enhancement (Appeal No. C/91/2012):
- In Appeal No. C/91/2012, the appellant challenged the enhancement of value due to an excess quantity of 7.6 sqm of Polished Granite Slabs found during examination. The declared quantity was 482 sqm, while the actual measurement was 489.6 sqm. The duty demand was confirmed based on this excess quantity, leading to a re-determination of value.
- The appellant argued that Public Notice No. 17/2010 allowed up to 5% excess quantity without fines or penalties. They contended that the excess quantity of 1.58% should not have been included in the total value, citing legal precedents to support their position.
- The Revenue's representative reiterated the findings of the impugned order, emphasizing the misdeclaration of quantity and value and the consequent imposition of fines and penalties for discrepancies exceeding permissible limits.

3. Judgment and Decision:
- The Tribunal upheld the impugned orders, stating that the appellant's reliance on Public Notice No. 17/2010 did not absolve them of the misdeclaration of quantity and value. The Tribunal noted that the Public Notice mandated the addition of excess weight in bills of entry and the recovery of duty for variations exceeding 5%, with fines and penalties for discrepancies beyond that threshold.
- The Tribunal found no error in the Commissioner's decision to enhance value and impose fines and penalties, as the discrepancies in quantity and value exceeded permissible limits. The legal precedents cited by the appellant were deemed inapplicable to the present case, leading to the dismissal of the appeals.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the imposition of fines and penalties for misdeclaration of quantity and value of imported Polished Granite Slabs, as discrepancies exceeded permissible limits outlined in Public Notice No. 17/2010. The judgment emphasized the importance of accurate declarations in customs matters and affirmed the Commissioner's decision based on the evidence presented.