2000 (7) TMI 510 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of the Exim Policy regarding the importation of used cars.
2. Determination of whether the appellant contravened the Exim Policy.
3. Assessment of excess importation of cars due to ignorance of law.
4. Valuation of imported cars and application of relevant sections of the Customs Act.
5. Confiscation and penalties imposed by the Customs authorities.

Interpretation of the Exim Policy: The case involved the interpretation of the Exim Policy regarding the importation of used cars. The Customs authorities confiscated 5 old and used cars but allowed clearance on payment of a redemption fine and imposed a penalty. The appellant argued that the importation of the cars was not prohibited under the Exim Policy.

Contravention of Exim Policy: The appellant contended that the importation of the cars was not in contravention of the Exim Policy, specifically pointing out that the Public Notice did not explicitly restrict importation to only new cars. The Tribunal agreed, stating that the absence of a specific mention of "new" cars in the relevant category permitted the importation of both new and old cars.

Excess Importation Due to Ignorance of Law: The appellant admitted to importing two cars in excess of the permissible limit due to ignorance of the law. The Tribunal acknowledged the explanation but noted that there was no outgo of foreign currency in this case, leading to a lenient view despite the lapse.

Valuation and Application of Customs Act: The Tribunal observed that while the Customs authorities enhanced the value of the cars, no action was taken under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act. The valuation issue was addressed in the context of the confiscation and penalties imposed.

Confiscation and Penalties: The Tribunal concluded that confiscating 3 cars permissible under the Public Notice was legally incorrect. As a result, the order relating to those 3 cars was set aside, while confiscation of the other cars was upheld. The redemption fine was reduced from Rs. 15 lakhs to Rs. 5 lakhs, and the penalty was reduced from Rs. 7.5 lakhs to Rs. 2 lakhs for the 2 cars held liable. The appeal was partially allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.