2024 (10) TMI 512 - AT - Customs

Enhancement of declared value of imported goods - old and used worn clothing, completely fumigated - confiscation - redemption fine - penalty - HELD THAT - This issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of VENUS TRADERS, RAINBOW INTERNATIONAL, AL-YASEEN ENTERPRISES, GLOBE INTERNATIONAL, KRISHNA EXPORT CORPORATION, PRECISION IMPEX, BMC SPINNERS PVT. LTD., SHIVAM TRADERS, LEELA WOOLEN MILLS, M.U. TEXTILES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS) MUMBAI 2018 (11) TMI 625 - CESTAT MUMBAI , wherein this Tribunal has observed ' Considering the various issues and submissions made and the failure of the original authority to comply with the direction in remand to disclose the margin of profit that prompted the fine and penalty, the matter would normally have to be remitted back by another remand order. However, the paucity of evidence and the negligible scope for ascertainment at this stage deters us from doing so. In the light of the admitted failure to comply with the licensing requirements, we uphold the confiscation of the goods under Section 111(d) of Customs Act, 1962. However, it is our opinion that the ends of justice would be served by reducing the redemption fine to 10% of the ascertained value and penalty to 5%.' It is held that the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the respondent to the tune of 10% 5% respectively on the assessed value is sufficient. Therefore, the redemption fine and penalty confirmed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) are sufficient to meet the end of justice. There are no infirmity in the impugned order and the same is upheld - appeal of Revenue dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
- Delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal
- Stay petitions filed by the Revenue
- Assessment of imported old and used worn clothing
- Enhancement of declared value and imposition of redemption fine and penalty
- Reduction of redemption fine and penalty by the Commissioner
- Appeal by the Revenue against the order
- Application of Section 111(m) and 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962
- Observations from a previous Tribunal case regarding confiscation and redemption fine
- Final decision on the redemption fine and penalty
- Confirmation of the impugned order
- Dismissal of the appeals filed by the Revenue

Analysis:

The judgment addresses the issue of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, where the reason for the delay is satisfactorily explained, leading to the condonation of the delay. The applications for condonation of delay are allowed. The Revenue has also filed applications for staying the operation of certain orders, which are found to be routine and devoid of merit, resulting in the rejection of the Stay Petitions.

Regarding the assessment of imported old and used worn clothing, the declared value was enhanced, and redemption fine and penalty were imposed due to the classification of the items under a restricted category for import. The Adjudicating Authority initially imposed a redemption fine and penalty, which were later reduced by the Commissioner on appeal. The Revenue, being dissatisfied, filed an appeal before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal examined the application of Section 111(m) and 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, referring to a previous case for guidance. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) due to the lack of a required import license. The judgment also discussed the reduction of redemption fine and penalty based on the principle that the ends of justice would be served adequately with a lower percentage.

Ultimately, the Tribunal confirmed the impugned order, finding no infirmity in it, and dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue. The decision was dictated and pronounced in open court, concluding the legal proceedings on the matter.