1995 (6) TMI 135 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Condonation of delay in filing appeals, absolute confiscation of car under Customs Act, 1962, permission for re-export of car by way of redemption.

Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeals:
The appellant filed a condonation of delay application for supplementary appeals due to the disposal of issues by the lower authority. The delay in filing the appeals was condoned as per the Tribunal's procedure, allowing the appellant to proceed with the appeals related to damaged goods.

Absolute Confiscation of Car under Customs Act, 1962:
The main issue was the absolute confiscation of a car under section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant imported the car under a Carnet valid until a specific date. Despite diligent efforts to extend the retention period, the appellant inadvertently violated the import conditions by retaining the car beyond the allowed period. The appellant argued that the confiscation was harsh and requested the option to redeem the car for re-export with a suitable fine. The appellant's clean record and efforts to seek extension were acknowledged, leading to a plea for reconsideration of the confiscation.

Permission for Re-Export of Car by Way of Redemption:
The confiscation of the car was not contested, and the focus shifted to the possibility of re-export through redemption. The appellant had actively pursued extension requests, which were not granted despite correspondence with authorities. The Tribunal noted the appellant's efforts and the lack of clear direction from authorities regarding surrender or re-export of the car. Considering the circumstances, the Tribunal upheld the confiscation but allowed the car to be re-exported upon payment of a redemption fine of Rs. 25,000. The authorities were directed to consider any duty due upon re-export.

In conclusion, the Tribunal addressed the issues of delay condonation, confiscation of the car, and permission for re-export through a detailed analysis of the appellant's actions, the legal provisions, and the authorities' responses. The judgment balanced the technical violation with the appellant's genuine efforts, resulting in a decision to allow re-export upon payment of a fine, emphasizing the responsibility of authorities to guide tourists on rights and obligations.