1991 (3) TMI 242 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty by the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay.
2. Review by the Central Board of Excise & Customs for enhancement of personal penalty.
3. Submission of judgment from the Court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bombay.
4. Arguments regarding deliberate mis-declaration and penalty enhancement.
5. Response to penalty enhancement and financial impact due to 1984 riots in Delhi.
6. Decision on penalty enhancement appeal.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties by the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay. The respondents imported 40 bales declared as Wool Waste, but 30 bales were found to contain Synthetic Waste. The Additional Collector ordered the confiscation of 30 bales with a redemption fine and imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 10,000. The charges were proven during adjudication proceedings.

2. The Central Board of Excise & Customs reviewed the case and found the penalty inadequate. They filed an appeal in the Tribunal seeking enhancement of the personal penalty due to deliberate mis-declaration by the respondents to evade duty payment.

3. The respondents submitted a judgment from the Court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bombay, where they were acquitted of certain charges under the Customs Act and other relevant laws. They also presented documents related to the 1984 riots in Delhi, affecting their factory.

4. Arguments were made regarding deliberate mis-declaration and penalty enhancement. The Additional Collector's findings indicated that the mis-declaration was intentional to evade duty payment, justifying an increase in the penalty amount.

5. The respondents argued against penalty enhancement, citing no mala fide intention and financial difficulties due to the 1984 riots. They claimed they had not redeemed the goods and had suffered losses. However, the Tribunal found the penalty inadequate and enhanced it to Rs. 25,000, considering the gravity of the offense.

6. The Tribunal, after considering all submissions and findings, allowed the appeal and increased the penalty amount to Rs. 25,000, emphasizing the deliberate attempt to evade duty payment and the lack of challenge to the initial penalty decision.