Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2000 (9) TMI AT This
Issues:
1. Confiscation of 284 bags of Gambier valued at Rs. 12,07,000 2. Imposition of penalty of Rs. 15 lacs Analysis: 1. The Department's Burden of Proving Foreign Origin and Smuggling: The Customs officers seized 284 bags of Gambier marked with "AGRO FOOD PTE LTD. SINGAPORE CHACHAN NEPAL" in Kanpur. The appellant claimed legal purchase locally, challenging the foreign origin and smuggling allegations. The Department argued the bags' markings indicated foreign origin and smuggling. The Tribunal noted the lack of evidence from the appellant to refute foreign origin claims. The bags were deemed of foreign origin and smuggled into India. 2. Verification of Goods' Origin and Legal Acquisition: The appellant presented bills from M/s. Vishal Traders and M/s. Yogesh Traders to support legal acquisition. However, scrutiny revealed discrepancies, casting doubt on the goods' origin and legality of acquisition. Despite the appellant's claims, the evidence did not support legal import. The bags' markings and lack of evidence led to the conclusion that the goods were indeed smuggled into India from Nepal. 3. Confiscation and Redemption of Goods: The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of the goods due to the foreign origin and smuggling findings. However, considering the circumstances, the goods could be redeemed upon payment of a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs. This decision balanced the enforcement of customs laws with the opportunity for redemption. 4. Penalty Imposition: The Tribunal found the imposed penalty of Rs. 15 lakhs excessive given the case details. The penalty was reduced to Rs. 3 lakhs, considering the facts and circumstances. This adjustment aimed to achieve a fair outcome in light of the legal complexities and evidence presented. In conclusion, the Tribunal confirmed the confiscation of the Gambier bags due to foreign origin and smuggling, allowing redemption upon payment of a fine. The penalty was reduced to Rs. 3 lakhs from Rs. 15 lakhs, ensuring a more proportionate outcome based on the case specifics.
|