2012 (11) TMI 648 - AT - Customs

Confiscation - Import of a car - violation of licencing restriction high end model namely BMW 730 D SE - Held that - Person who has lived in a foreign country for a period of 3 years and above is entitled to import a car without licence provided the vehicle was in his use for a minimum period of one year before his return to India - vehicle was procured by the appellant only on 9-8-2010 and shipped immediately thereafter as seen from the Bill of Lading dated 27-8-2010. Therefore, the import is clearly in violation of licensing restrictions - car is liable for confiscation Whether the car should be confiscated absolutely or allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine Held that - Appellant was living in a foreign country for about 3 years. Further, there is no allegation that the vehicle was sought to be imported by somebody else using the name of the appellant or any other similar allegations - option to redeem the vehicle on payment of fine deserves to be given to the appellant. Enhancement of the value Held that - Vehicle has been imported in violation of licencing restrictions and attempted to be cleared declaring a price lower than even the admitted price - enhancement of value is upheld. - the assessable value of the impugned car works out to Rs. 18,60,725.00.

Summary

Issues:
Violation of Import Licensing Notes, Confiscation of Vehicle, Enhancement of Value, Imposition of Penalty

Violation of Import Licensing Notes:
The appellant imported a used BMW car without meeting the minimum one-year ownership requirement before returning to India. The car was acquired just before importation, violating licensing restrictions. The Tribunal held that the import was in clear violation of licensing regulations, justifying confiscation. However, considering the appellant's residency abroad for over 3 years and no fraudulent intent, an option to redeem the vehicle on payment of a fine was granted.

Confiscation of Vehicle:
The Tribunal deliberated on whether the car should be confiscated absolutely or allowed redemption on payment of a fine. Given the appellant's extended stay abroad and lack of fraudulent activities, the Tribunal decided to permit redemption on payment of a fine, acknowledging the appellant's genuine intent as an importer.

Enhancement of Value:
The Tribunal analyzed the discrepancy in the declared value of the imported car compared to its actual worth. The appellant declared a significantly lower value than the actual value based on the manufacturer's information. The Tribunal found the declared value unreasonably low, considering the high-end model and condition of the vehicle. The documents provided by the appellant to support the lower value were deemed unreliable, leading to the upholding of the enhanced value determined by the authorities.

Imposition of Penalty:
The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed on the appellant for violating licensing restrictions and undervaluing the imported vehicle. Despite the appellant's claims of technical violations and genuine import intentions, the Tribunal found the penalty justified. The penalty amount was sustained by the Commissioner (Appeals) and deemed appropriate, considering the circumstances of the case.

This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore highlights the key issues of violation of import licensing notes, confiscation of the vehicle, enhancement of value, and imposition of the penalty. The Tribunal's decision considered the facts, submissions from both sides, and relevant legal provisions to arrive at a comprehensive and fair judgment.