1997 (3) TMI 291 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against the order of Collector (Appeals) confiscating a revolver imported from Germany.
- Consideration of Government of India's instructions dated 5-1-1988 regarding importation of fire-arms.
- Interpretation of Import Control Order, 1955 and relevant provisions.
- Justification of confiscation of the fire-arm imported without necessary licenses.
- Application of ITC Order, 1955 and Customs Act in the case.
- Examination of the prohibition on importation of revolvers and pistols under relevant laws.
- Discretion of adjudicating authority to allow release on redemption fine.
- Reference to subsequent policy by the Collector (A) and its relevance.
- Analysis of Government of India instructions dated 5-1-1988 and its applicability.
- Importation of fire-arm by post and its violation of Postal Act.
- Plea for re-export and its consideration.
- Comparison with Tribunal's previous orders allowing release on payment of redemption fine.
- Assessment of the adequacy of the redemption fine imposed.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The appellant, a doctor practicing in Kanpur and a retired Army officer, appealed against the confiscation of a revolver imported from Germany. The Collector (Appeals) confirmed the confiscation on the grounds of prohibited importation of fire-arms.
2. The appellant argued for release based on Government of India's instructions dated 5-1-1988, allowing regularization of imports made up to 31-1-1987. However, the importation in this case predated the specified date, making the relaxation inapplicable.
3. The adjudicating authority justified the confiscation based on the prohibition under the ITC Order, 1955, and relevant customs laws. The importation of revolvers and pistols was prohibited at the time of importation, justifying the confiscation.
4. The Collector (A) erred in referring to a subsequent policy, as the prohibition was already in force during the importation, rendering the relaxation inapplicable to this case.
5. The Government of India's instructions dated 5-1-1988 did not alter the provisions of the ITC Act and Orders, and the appellant's case did not fall under the categories specified for relaxation.
6. Importation of fire-arm by post was a violation, but the order-in-original did not address this aspect specifically. The plea for re-export was made initially but not reiterated during subsequent proceedings.
7. The Tribunal's previous orders allowing release on payment of redemption fine were cited, indicating a precedent for such cases.
8. The adequacy of the redemption fine imposed was questioned, considering the high premium on foreign-made weapons in the Indian market, suggesting a need for further assessment by the adjudicating authority.

Conclusion:
The appeal was allowed, remanding the matter to the Adjudicating Officer for reconsideration of release on payment of a suitable redemption fine, considering the appellant's possession license under the Arms Act and ensuring a surety bond against transfer of the arm in India.