9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Confiscation of goods declared in the Bill of Entry and excess goods. 2. Imposition of penalty under the Customs Act. 3. Justification for confiscation and penalty. 4. Arguments by the appellant and respondent. 5. Examination of evidence and findings. 6. Decision and order of the Appellate Tribunal. Confiscation of Goods: The case involved the importation of goods by M/s. Indian Shaving Products Ltd., where excess goods were found in the package compared to what was declared in the Bill of Entry. The Customs Department seized the excess goods under the belief of possible confiscation under relevant sections of the Customs Act. The adjudicating authority ordered the confiscation of the excess goods and the packages, citing the party's request for green channel clearance as an attempt to avoid examination and detection of excess goods. Imposition of Penalty: The adjudicating authority imposed a fine and a personal penalty on M/s. Indian Shaving Products Ltd. under various sections of the Customs Act for the contravention of import regulations. The penalty was based on the belief that there was an intention to evade payment of Customs Duty. Justification for Confiscation and Penalty: The Customs Department justified the confiscation of excess goods and packages, emphasizing that the excess goods were found to be in excess of the declared goods and that green channel clearance would have facilitated duty evasion. The Department argued that the goods were useful in the importer's plant, indicating they were intended for the importer and not declared to evade duty. Arguments by Appellant and Respondent: The appellant contended that the excess goods were inadvertently packed by the supplier and were not useful to them, thus no intention to evade duty existed. The appellant also argued against the imposition of penalties, stating they were unwarranted. The respondent supported the adjudicating authority's decision, highlighting the findings and justifications provided in the order. Examination of Evidence and Findings: The Appellate Tribunal examined the evidence and found that the confiscation of the declared goods was not justified. The Tribunal noted discrepancies in the examination report and the handling of the goods, indicating that the importer was not responsible for the supplier's error. The Tribunal concluded that there was no evidence of intent to evade duty and set aside the confiscation of the declared goods and the personal penalty. Decision of the Appellate Tribunal: The Appellate Tribunal set aside the confiscation of the declared goods and the personal penalty imposed on M/s. Indian Shaving Products Ltd. The Tribunal allowed the Customs Department to deal with the excess goods as deemed fit in accordance with the law. The appeal was disposed of based on these findings and decisions.
|
