2000 (7) TMI 113 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Transfer of cases between Zonal Benches without proper authorization.
2. Jurisdiction of benches to hear matters.
3. Imposition of redemption fine and penalty on the appellant.

Issue 1: Transfer of cases between Zonal Benches without proper authorization:
The case involved appeals C/281 and 282/99 filed before the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal, which were directed to be heard by the South Zonal Bench at Chennai. However, the South Zonal Bench found it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeals without a transfer order from the President. Consequently, the South Zonal Bench referred the appeals back to the President for appropriate orders. The President then directed the cases to be posted before a Larger Bench, leading to the current proceedings.

Issue 2: Jurisdiction of benches to hear matters:
The Tribunal analyzed the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, which govern the constitution of benches. It was established that transfer between Zonal Benches can only be done through a general or special order of the President. In this case, the Northern Bench failed to follow the correct procedure by not seeking specific orders from the President to transfer the cases to the South Zonal Bench. As a result, the South Zonal Bench rightfully referred the appeals back to the President for proper authorization, leading to the involvement of the current bench for adjudication.

Issue 3: Imposition of redemption fine and penalty on the appellant:
The appellant, M/s. Harpreet International, was involved in the importation of goods declared as Mulathi and Poppy Seeds. The Commissioner found discrepancies in the import, leading to the imposition of a redemption fine of Rs. 60 lacs and a penalty of Rs. 10 lacs. However, the Tribunal disagreed with the quantum of fines and penalties imposed. It reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 21 lacs and the penalty to Rs. 4,50,000. The Tribunal also clarified that certain actions of the appellant were not illegal under the Customs Act, and penalties imposed on individuals not directly involved in the disputed import were vacated.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals by modifying the orders, reducing the redemption fine and penalties imposed on the appellant, and providing consequential relief as necessary.