2013 (12) TMI 231 - AT - Customs

Penalty under the provisions of Section 117 read with Section 72 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Non clearance of the goods from the warehouse - Held that - Appellant had imported various consignments and inadvertently has not cleared the consignment of 4.99 MT within a stipulated period of one year, as provided under Section 72 of the Customs Act, 1962. I find that the appellant has cleared the consignment from the warehouse almost after a period of three years from the date of expiry of the period of one year and during which period holdup the consignment in warehouse. Appellant has violated the provisions of Section 61 and is liable to be penalised under Section 72 of the Customs Act, 1962. Considering the amount of duty involved in this case, I find that the ends of justice would be met, if the penalty imposed on the appellant is reduced to a nominal penalty - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Deposit of duty liability and interest on goods warehoused under Customs Act, 1962.
2. Imposition of penalty under Sections 117 and 72 of the Customs Act, 1962 for non-clearance of goods from the warehouse.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Deposit of duty liability and interest on warehoused goods
The appellant had deposited the duty liability along with interest on goods not cleared from the warehouse under Section 61 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant produced a challan showing the deposit of Rs. 5,876/- towards duty liability and Rs. 3445/- towards interest. The Tribunal acknowledged the deposit and confirmed the appellant's compliance with the duty liability and interest.

Issue 2: Imposition of penalty for non-clearance of goods from the warehouse
The primary issue in this case was the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- under Sections 117 and 72 of the Customs Act, 1962 for the appellant's failure to clear consignments within the stipulated period. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had violated Section 61 by not clearing the consignment of 4.99 MT within one year as required by law. The consignment was eventually cleared after a delay of almost three years. Considering the circumstances and the duty involved, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to reduce the penalty to a nominal amount of Rs. 1000/- to meet the ends of justice.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the appeal against the duty liability and interest payment, upholding the confirmation of the demand. However, the penalty imposed on the appellant was reduced from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 1000/- due to the delay in clearing the consignment from the warehouse. The appeal was partly allowed with the modification in the penalty amount.