9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Allegation of predating the Bill of Lading to circumvent possession conditions for import. 2. Confiscation and penalties imposed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs. 3. Appeal against the Order-in-Original before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). 4. Decision of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) setting aside absolute confiscation and reducing penalties. 5. Further appeal challenging the redemption fine and penalties imposed. Issue 1: The appellant was accused of pre-dating the Bill of Lading to avoid possession conditions for importing a second-hand car. The Joint Commissioner of Customs ordered absolute confiscation and imposed penalties based on the alleged violation. The appellant contended that the car was purchased before the possession condition notification and challenged the confiscation. Issue 2: The Joint Commissioner's Order-in-Original included absolute confiscation of the car, penalties on the importer and the cargo company, and dropping charges against another party. The penalties were imposed under specific sections of the Customs Act, 1962, related to import violations. Issue 3: The appellant appealed the Order-in-Original before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), arguing against the predating allegation, confiscation, and penalties. The Commissioner set aside the confiscation, considering the goods were not prohibited, and reduced the penalties due to demurrage and detention charges incurred by the appellant. Issue 4: The appellant further appealed, challenging the redemption fine and penalties imposed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The appellant argued against the applicability of the possession condition notification, the sustainability of the redemption fine, and the deterioration of the vehicle due to detention. Issue 5: During the final appeal hearing, the appellant contested the notification's applicability, the imposition of redemption fine, and cited relevant legal precedents. The appellant claimed eligibility for a specific Public Notice and questioned the calculation of redemption fine based on profit margins. In the final judgment, the Tribunal upheld the confiscation but reduced the redemption fine and penalties considering the appellant's circumstances, including demurrage costs and the vehicle's condition. The Tribunal found the possession condition notification applicable and ordered the release of the car upon payment of reduced fines and applicable duties to prevent further financial burden on the appellant.
|
