9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Rectification of mistake apparent on the face of the record in the final order of the Tribunal regarding the redemption fine imposed. Analysis: The application for rectification was based on the contention that the Tribunal's order contained a mistake in para 21 concerning the decision to allow the option of a fine in lieu of confiscation and the modification of the order of absolute confiscation of the ball bearings of foreign origin. The mistake was identified as the imposition of a redemption fine of Rs. 25 lakhs, which was argued to not be in accordance with Section 125 of the Customs Act. The counsel highlighted that the Tribunal had not considered the CIF value of the goods while determining the redemption fine, which led to an incorrect calculation based solely on the market value including a 100% profit margin. The respondent opposed the application, stating that the purpose was to reduce the quantum of the redemption fine, which was not permissible through a rectification application. It was argued that the redemption fine imposed was within the maximum permissible limit under Section 125. The Tribunal's decision was based on the consideration that the redemption fine should not exceed the market price of the goods, as stipulated by the Customs Act. The Tribunal found that there was no evidence supporting the legal import of the ball bearings, making the importation illegal and thus subject to a redemption fine. The Tribunal concluded that the application for rectification could not be entertained as it would amount to a review or appeal of the original order, which is beyond the scope of rectification. It was emphasized that the payment of redemption fine is distinct from the payment of duty, as clarified by a relevant Delhi High Court judgment. Therefore, no error was found on the face of the record that warranted rectification. The application was rejected, but the applicants were given additional time to exercise the option for redemption if they so desired before a specified date. In summary, the judgment addressed the issue of rectification of a mistake apparent on the face of the record in the Tribunal's final order regarding the redemption fine imposed, emphasizing the legal provisions under the Customs Act and the scope of rectification applications.
|
