9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge of confiscation and penalty imposed by Customs authorities on exported basmati rice infested with insects. Analysis: The Appellant exported basmati rice to Mauritius with an assessable value of Rs. 30,37,799, but the buyer rejected the rice due to insect infestation. Upon return to India, the Customs authorities confiscated the rice for violating the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. A penalty of Rs. 75,000 was also imposed on the Appellant. The Appellant contested the confiscation and penalty, leading to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal upholding the decision. The Appellant argued that the rice was insect-free when exported, supported by a certificate from the Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine, and Storage, Government of India. However, the High Court noted that the rice was infested upon re-entry to India, possibly during transit despite the initial certification. The High Court acknowledged the low penalty amount relative to the rice's value but deemed the penalty justified due to the seriousness of importing insect-infested basmati rice in violation of food safety laws. The Court declined to interfere with the penalty's quantum, considering the gravity of the offense. Additionally, the Appellant raised concerns about a Rs. 3 lakh redemption fine imposed, representing 10% of the goods' assessable value. The Court found this fine reasonable and not excessive, rejecting the Appellant's argument against it. Ultimately, the High Court concluded that the Tribunal's decision was not unjustified or perverse, finding no substantial legal question to warrant further review. In summary, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the confiscation and penalty imposed by the Customs authorities on the Appellant for importing insect-infested basmati rice in violation of food safety regulations. The Court emphasized the seriousness of the offense and the reasonable nature of the penalties, declining to interfere with the Tribunal's decision.
|
