9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Misdeclaration of imported goods, Penalty imposition, Abetting in misdeclaration
The judgment pertains to an appeal filed by M/s. Mody Brothers against the order of the Collector of Customs, Bombay, regarding the misdeclaration of imported goods. The imported goods, initially declared as brass dross, were found to be brass scrap upon inspection. The importers had claimed clearance under a specific policy, but misdeclaration led to a higher rate of duty. The appellants, as indenting agents, were accused of being party to the misdeclaration. The Collector confiscated the goods but allowed redemption upon payment of a fine and imposed penalties on both importers and indenting agents. The main issue raised in the appeal was the refund of the penalty imposed on the importers. The judgment analyzed the evidence and found that the appellants had not made efforts to clarify the misdeclaration with the supplier, indicating their involvement in abetting the misdeclaration. Citing legal precedents, the judgment emphasized that the incorrect mention of legal provisions does not invalidate the proceedings if there is a valid basis for the order. The judgment referred to the Supreme Court's decision in the case of J.K. Steel Ltd. v. Union of India, highlighting that non-mentioning of legal provisions does not vitiate proceedings. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the penalty but reduced it from Rs. 5000.00 to Rs. 2500.00 for the appellants. The order directed the revenue authorities to implement the modified penalty. The appeal was rejected except for the penalty reduction, considering the gravity of the offense and the principles of justice.
|
