9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Interpretation of customs policy regarding import of brass wire. 2. Classification of imported brass wire under specific entries of the customs policy. 3. Assessment of redemption fine in lieu of confiscation. Analysis: Issue 1: The appeal challenged the Order-in-Appeal confirming the confiscation of a consignment of brass wire imported by the appellant. The appellant claimed the brass wire fell under a specific entry in the customs policy, allowing clearance under Open General Licence (OGL). The Customs authority objected, leading to adjudication and the impugned order of confiscation. Issue 2: The appellant argued that the brass wire imported did not fall under the entry objected by the Customs authority, emphasizing that the wire was non-ferrous and suitable for making brass strips. The Customs authority contended that the wire, being extrusion quality, did not qualify for clearance under the claimed entry and referenced other entries to support their position. The Tribunal analyzed the policy entries and concluded that the imported wire did not fit within the specified entry for clearance under OGL. Issue 3: The appellant also contested the quantum of redemption fine imposed, arguing it was excessive and disproportionate. Considering the appellant's status as an actual user and absence of diversion allegations, the Tribunal reduced the fine from Rs. 1,00,000/- to Rs. 40,000/-, while upholding the confiscation order. The Tribunal granted partial relief to the appellant by reducing the fine amount, acknowledging the appellant's genuine intent as an actual user. In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, sustaining the confiscation order but reducing the fine in lieu of confiscation to Rs. 40,000/-. The judgment clarified the interpretation of customs policy entries, specifically addressing the classification of imported brass wire and the assessment of redemption fine based on the circumstances of the case.
|
