2000 (11) TMI 979 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Import of goods - Mis-declaration and concealment
2. Confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties
3. Request for mutilation of serviceable goods
4. Duty determination and penalty imposition
5. Appeal for waiver of demurrage charges

Issue 1: Import of goods - Mis-declaration and concealment
The case involved two appeals filed by an importer and the Managing Director of an importing company regarding the import of bushellings and scrap from Malaysia. The Department of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) officers conducted an investigation and found discrepancies in the consignment, leading to a show cause notice. The goods were alleged to have been mis-declared, resulting in a differential duty amount. The Commissioner ordered confiscation of goods and imposed penalties under various sections of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 2: Confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties
The Commissioner ordered the confiscation of goods due to concealment and mis-declaration, along with the imposition of a fine for redemption. Differential duty, interest, and penalties were determined and demanded from the importing company and the Managing Director. The penalties imposed were significant, with a fine on the importing company and the Managing Director, along with interest and redemption charges.

Issue 3: Request for mutilation of serviceable goods
The appellants submitted a letter requesting the mutilation of serviceable goods found in the consignment, as per the practice in similar cases. The argument was based on the definition of "bushelling scrap" and previous tribunal decisions allowing mutilation of goods to qualify as scrap. The appellants emphasized their willingness to comply with the mutilation process and requested the benefit of relevant notifications for scrap clearance.

Issue 4: Duty determination and penalty imposition
The appellants argued that the consignment primarily consisted of scrap material, and any new sheets found were for mutilation. They cited previous court decisions and customs instructions supporting the practice of allowing mutilation for consignments with serviceable items. The Tribunal found no deliberate attempt at mis-declaration and set aside the duty demands and penalties imposed by the Commissioner.

Issue 5: Appeal for waiver of demurrage charges
The appellants requested a waiver of demurrage charges, citing precedents and decisions in similar cases. They sought a direction to the Commissioner for the waiver, considering the circumstances of the case. The Tribunal recommended issuing a necessary certificate to the concerned authority for the waiver of demurrage charges, aligning with previous judgments.

This detailed analysis covers the import of goods, confiscation, penalties, mutilation request, duty determination, penalty imposition, and the appeal for waiver of demurrage charges in the legal judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Chennai.