9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Confiscation of imported Video Cassette mould under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, validity of registration certificate requirement for importers under para 22A of Appendix 6 of the Import & Export Policy, imposition of redemption fine, applicability of case laws cited by the appellants, reduction of redemption fine. Analysis: The appellants challenged the confiscation of the imported Video Cassette mould valued at Rs. 2,93,031 under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, contending that they were registered as a small scale industrial unit and had a valid registration certificate. The Additional Collector of Customs held the goods liable for confiscation due to the absence of a valid license but refrained from imposing a personal penalty. The appellants argued that they had the registration certificate at the time of filing the Bill of Entry, even though it was obtained after the arrival of the goods. They also claimed that the subject goods were essential for their manufacturing process and cited case laws to support their case. The Respondent, represented by the SDR, argued that the importer must be registered at the time of shipment, not just at the time of clearance, as per the Import & Export Policy. They rejected the appellants' claim that the goods were plastic boxes themselves, stating that the amendment of the registration certificate indicated otherwise. The SDR also defended the redemption fine, deeming it proportionate to the value of the imported goods. The Judge considered the submissions and cited case laws to support the decision. The Judge found that the amendment to the registration certificate was made after the shipment, which did not comply with the requirement of being registered at the time of importation. The Judge rejected the appellants' claim regarding the nature of the goods and upheld the adjudication order deeming the import illegal. However, considering the circumstances, the Judge deemed the redemption fine of Rs. 30,000 excessive and reduced it to Rs. 15,000. In conclusion, the appeal was rejected except for the modification of the redemption fine. The Judge upheld the confiscation of the imported goods but reduced the redemption fine based on the circumstances of the case.
|
