2013 (1) TMI 563 - AT - Customs

Illegal Foreign origin sheep import without payment of Customs duty - Held that - Considering the assessee s submission that they are poor persons and the very fact that they had brought sheep of foreign origin in the vessels for a small consideration would show that they were not professional smugglers and the activities were undertaken at the request of local resident and sheep were brought to India. Thus the value of the sheep involved and the very fact that the sheep were brought in four vessels and found in farm house in Ahmedabad would lend credence to the claim of the assessee. Sheep is not an item which is regularly smuggled or commodities prone to smuggling thus supports the case for reduced penalty - substantial reduction in fine and penalty is warranted - reduce the redemption fine on the four vessels to Rs. 50,000/- each and penalty on both the appellants to Rs. 5,000/- each.

Summary

Issues: Smuggling of sheep, liability for confiscation, imposition of fine, imposition of penalties, reduction of redemption fine, reduction of penalty.

In this case, the issue revolved around the smuggling of foreign origin sheep brought illegally and without payment of customs duty through vessels, leading to the arrival of 16 sheep at a port and subsequent transportation to a farm without informing government agencies. The government veterinary officer confirmed the foreign origin breed of the sheep. The Commissioner reduced the fine in lieu of confiscation for the vessels and penalties on the owners in the impugned order. The appellants appealed against this order, contending that they were not professional smugglers but were poor individuals who brought the sheep for a small consideration at the request of a local resident. They argued that the redemption fine and penalties were excessively high even after the reduction by the Commissioner.

Upon hearing both sides, the judges noted that there was no dispute regarding the smuggling of sheep and the liability for confiscation and penalties. The appellants did not contest these issues. The appellants' consultant argued that due to their financial status and the circumstances under which the sheep were brought, a substantial reduction in the redemption fine and penalties was warranted. The judges found merit in this argument, considering the value of the sheep, the manner in which they were brought, and the nature of the commodity involved. Therefore, they decided to reduce the redemption fine on the vessels to Rs. 50,000 each and the penalty on both appellants to Rs. 5,000 each.

In conclusion, the judges upheld the impugned order except for the relief provided by reducing the redemption fine and penalties for the appellants. The reduction was deemed appropriate given the circumstances and arguments presented during the hearing.