Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2000 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2000 (11) TMI 196 - AT - Customs

Issues involved: Appeal against order-in-original for confiscation of readymade garments and used clothing, valuation of goods, misdeclaration of goods, confiscation u/s 111(d) and 111(m), penalty u/s 112(a) of Customs Act.

Valuation of Goods: The appellants challenged the loading of value of goods from US $ 0.40 to US $ 0.50, citing legal precedents. However, the Tribunal held that once the loaded value was accepted and duty paid without protest, appellants were estopped from challenging it later. The loaded value was accepted in presence of their Representative/Attorney, and no reservation was made to contest it subsequently. The Tribunal found no grounds to revisit the valuation based on the facts presented.

Confiscation of Goods: The appellants imported readymade garments without a specific import license, misdeclaring the goods, leading to confiscation u/s 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation, stating that the goods were liable for confiscation due to misdeclaration and import without the required license. The Commissioner's order regarding confiscation was deemed legal and justified.

Redemption Fine and Penalty: The redemption fine of Rs. 5,00,000 and penalty of Rs. 50,000 imposed on the appellants were upheld by the Tribunal. The fine and penalty were considered appropriate given the intentional misdeclaration and attempt to evade customs duty. The appellants' plea regarding demurrage and landed cost not justifying the fine and penalty was rejected, as their conduct was deemed mala fide and aimed at deceiving customs authorities.

Conclusion: The Tribunal found no merit in the appeal, upholding the Commissioner's order of confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty. The appellants' attempt to challenge the valuation of goods after accepting and paying duty on the loaded value was dismissed. The Tribunal deemed the actions of the appellants as deliberate misdeclaration and upheld the penalties imposed, denying any leniency due to their fraudulent conduct.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates