1993 (8) TMI 195 - AT - Customs

Issues Involved:
1. Confiscation of consignments under Section 111(d), (m), and (i) of the Customs Act.
2. Valuation and duty assessment of copper scrap and copper wires.
3. Plea for de novo adjudication and remand.
4. Consideration of copper wires as scrap.
5. Request for clearance of goods after mutilation.
6. Imposition of personal penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Confiscation of Consignments:
The appeal challenges the confiscation of consignments declared as copper scrap but found to contain copper wires in coils, concealed within the scrap. The adjudicating authority ordered confiscation under Section 111(d), (m), and (i) of the Customs Act, read with Section 3(2) of the Import and Export Trade (Control) Act, 1947. The authority also imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- on the appellants under Section 112 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal upheld the finding that the copper wires in coils were concealed and not declared as scrap, thus justifying the confiscation.

2. Valuation and Duty Assessment:
The adjudicating authority ordered the segregation of copper scrap and copper wires in coils for valuation purposes. The scrap was to be assessed at the declared value, while the copper wires were to be assessed at Rs. 50,482.50 per tonne based on the LME price prevailing on 4-6-1988. The Tribunal found no submission challenging the assessed value and upheld the valuation ordered by the adjudicating authority.

3. Plea for De Novo Adjudication and Remand:
The appellants argued for remand for de novo adjudication on grounds such as non-consideration of written contracts, non-supply of photographs and test reports, and overlooking previous clearances of similar consignments. The Tribunal found these grounds unconvincing, noting that the adjudicating authority had considered all relevant aspects and that non-supply of documents did not prejudice the appellants' defense. The Tribunal also observed that the appellants had waived the issuance of a show-cause notice before the High Court, further negating the need for remand.

4. Consideration of Copper Wires as Scrap:
The appellants contended that the copper wires in coils were scrap as per International Nari's Specification. However, the Tribunal found that the wires were neatly packed, tagged, and not recognizable as scrap. The test report indicated that the wires were new, unused, and of high purity, suitable for use as conductors. The Tribunal concluded that the wires could not be considered scrap and upheld the adjudicating authority's finding.

5. Request for Clearance of Goods After Mutilation:
The appellants requested clearance of the goods after mutilation at their cost. The Tribunal noted that such clearance is discretionary and not a right. Given that a significant portion of the consignment was copper wires in coils, the Tribunal found that permitting clearance after mutilation would grant undue advantage to the appellants. The request for clearance after mutilation was denied.

6. Imposition of Personal Penalty:
The appellants argued against the personal penalty, citing lack of knowledge and the sale of goods on a high sea sale basis. The Tribunal found the appellants' claims unconvincing, noting that the party who reportedly purchased the goods did not intervene in the proceedings. The Tribunal upheld the liability under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act but reduced the personal penalty from Rs. 5,00,000/- to Rs. 2,50,000/-.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal substantially confirmed the order of the adjudicating authority but modified it to restrict confiscation to the copper wires in coils, granting the appellants an option to pay a fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- in lieu of confiscation. The personal penalty was reduced to Rs. 2,50,000/-. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, and the cross-objection was also disposed of.

← Previous Next →