1999 (11) TMI 480 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Imposition of penalty and confiscation under Section 112 of Customs Act.
2. Appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs.
3. Contention regarding the imposition of Redemption Fine.
4. Analysis of the circumstances justifying the penalty and non-imposition of fine.
5. Consideration of the Apex Court judgment on the imposition of redemption fine.
6. Examination of the criteria for non-imposition of fine under Section 125.
7. Determination of the appropriate fine to be imposed.

Issue 1: Imposition of penalty and confiscation under Section 112 of Customs Act
The Commissioner of Customs held that certain sewing machines and ironing tables were liable for confiscation under Section 112 of the Customs Act due to violations committed by the appellants. A penalty was imposed on the parties involved, with different amounts specified for each entity.

Issue 2: Appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs
The Revenue appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner, specifically contesting the decision not to impose a Redemption Fine and seeking an enhancement of the penalty imposed on the respondent.

Issue 3: Contention regarding the imposition of Redemption Fine
The appellant argued that there was no intention to sell the imported machinery, which had been shifted to another unit to fulfill urgent export orders. The appellant contended that the penalty imposed was already substantial and covered the redemption fine part, citing a Supreme Court judgment on the quantum of redemption fine.

Issue 4: Analysis of the circumstances justifying the penalty and non-imposition of fine
The Commissioner found fault with the appellants for not seeking permission to shift the machinery, although it was done to meet urgent business requirements and avoid losses. Despite extenuating circumstances, a significant penalty was imposed, which the Revenue sought to enhance.

Issue 5: Consideration of the Apex Court judgment on the imposition of redemption fine
The Apex Court judgment highlighted that the imposition of redemption fine depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, emphasizing that good faith alone does not warrant a waiver of the fine. The Commissioner's decision not to impose a fine was considered in light of this judgment.

Issue 6: Examination of the criteria for non-imposition of fine under Section 125
Section 125 of the Customs Act provides for the option to redeem goods on payment of a fine, with no specific criteria for non-imposition of a fine. The Revenue argued that a fine should be imposed as per the provisions of Section 125.

Issue 7: Determination of the appropriate fine to be imposed
After considering all aspects, the Tribunal modified the order, directing the respondents to pay a redemption fine of Rs. 5,000 only, citing special circumstances and the already substantial penalty paid by the appellants. The decision balanced the requirements of Section 125 with the extenuating circumstances of the case.