2013 (8) TMI 655 - AT - Customs

Fraudulent intent - non-Basmati rice was exported in the guise of Basmati Rice department confiscated the basmati rice and also confiscated that non-basmati rice as these were used for concealing the non-basmati rice - Redemption fine and penalty was imposed Held that - There was fraudulent intent to defraud Government revenue - Attempt had been made to export non-basmati rice in the guise of basmati rice - This was fit case for confiscation, imposition of redemption fine and imposition of penalty - Commissioner (A) already reduced redemption fine - No further interference required on this aspect as already excessive benefit has been given by commissioner (Appeal). stay application - imposition of penalty - considering attempts of illegal exports appropriate penalty had been imposed - no case for reduction stay application and appeal decided against the assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Stay application for penalty imposed on the appellant.
2. Export of non-Basmati rice in the guise of Basmati Rice.
3. Confiscation of rice, imposition of redemption fine, and penalty on M/s Yashi International.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, M/s Yashi International, filed a stay application challenging the penalty of Rs. One lakh imposed on them as being on the higher side. The appellant's counsel contended for relief in this regard.
2. The case involved the fraudulent export of non-Basmati rice disguised as Basmati Rice. Upon inspection at ICD, Patli, Gurgaon, it was discovered that the goods declared as Indian Basmati Rice were actually non-Basmati rice packed in plastic bags. Laboratory tests confirmed the presence of non-Basmati rice, violating export policies. The total rice weight was also found to be higher than declared in the invoices.
3. The adjudicating authority confiscated the Basmati rice and non-Basmati rice used for concealment, along with imposing a redemption fine of Rs.1,50,000/- and a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- on M/s Yashi International. The Commissioner (A) reduced the redemption fine to Rs.50,000/-, but no further interference was deemed necessary as the penalty was appropriate for the attempted illegal exports.
4. The Tribunal upheld the imposition of the penalty, stating that there was no case for reduction considering the fraudulent intent to defraud government revenue by exporting non-Basmati rice as Basmati Rice. The stay application and appeal were both dismissed, allowing the revenue to realize the amount from the bank guarantee held by them.