2024 (7) TMI 18 - AT - Customs

Confiscation and imposition of fine and penalty on the imported polished marble slab of different varieties - violation of condition of the Policy - enhancement of value without conducting market survey - quantum of fine and penalty arrived at by the learned Commissioner(Appeals) is justified or not - HELD THAT - Undisputedly the appellant had imported two consignments against Bill of Entry No.6575026 dated 27.08.2014 and Bill of Entry No.7112079 dated 18.10.2014 of marble slabs of different varieties declaring various rates per sq.m. which is lesser than 60 USD per sq.m. Consequently, on their request, the adjudicating authority enhanced the value to 60 USD per sq.m. and allowed clearances of the goods after imposition of fine and penalty. The learned Commissioner(Appeals), considering the circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that it was unintentional mistake on the part of the appellant, reduced the fine and penalty. The learned advocate ahad submitted that while directing confiscation and allowing redemption on payment of fine and penalty, no market survey has been carried out; therefore such action is not sustainable in law. There are no merit in the contention of the learned advocate as on their request only, the value of the imported marble slabs was enhanced to 60 USD and thereafter clearance was allowed subject to payment of redemption fine and penalty on adjudication by the concerned authority. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, direction of payment of redemption fine to the extent of 22% and imposition of penalty around 6%, is harsh and deserve to be reduced as consistently held by this Tribunal in a series of cases including the case of Sri Sai Graphics (supra) that in case of import of items like MFDs in similar circumstances without a valid licence, when the value has been enhanced on the basis of Chartered Engineer s Certificate, imposition of redemption fine to the extent of 10% and 5% as penalty of the enhanced value would meet the ends of justice. The interest of justice would be met if the redemption fine and penalty is reduced to 10% and 5% respectively of the enhanced value in each of the appeal. Accordingly, the order is modified to this extent and fine and penalty are reduced in each of the appeal to 10% / 5% of the enhanced value - appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
- Whether the direction of confiscation and imposition of fine and penalty on the imported marble slabs is justified.
- Whether the quantum of fine and penalty arrived at by the learned Commissioner(Appeals) is justified or not.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs(Appeals), Bangalore, involving the clearance of imported marble slabs. The appellant imported marble slabs at a value less than 60 USD per square meter, violating the policy condition. The Department raised queries leading to confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties. The appellant contended that the goods were imported for the first time, unaware of the policy condition, and imported without a valid license due to a bona fide mistake. The Department unilaterally enhanced the value to 60 USD per square meter without a market survey. The learned AR for the Revenue supported the confiscation and penalties imposed. The Tribunal considered the circumstances and reduced the fines and penalties imposed by the Commissioner(Appeals), citing previous judgments. The Tribunal found the direction of confiscation and penalties justified but deemed the quantum of fines and penalties harsh. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal reduced the redemption fine and penalty to 10% and 5% of the enhanced value, respectively, in each appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal modified the orders, reducing the fines and penalties to 10% and 5% of the enhanced value in each appeal, in line with previous judgments. The appeals were disposed of accordingly.