2014 (6) TMI 337 - AT - Customs

Requantification of redemption fine - import of new Passenger Car Radial Tyres of mixed sizes - import in contravention of the provisions of the Pneumatic Tyres and Tubes for Automotive Vehicles (Quality Control) order, 2009 issued under Section 14 of the Bureau of Indian Standard Act, 1986 - Revenue contends that that the BIC certificate was valid only upto 31.12.2012 and had expired - Commissioner (appeals) observed that, even if the import of some of the Tyre was contrary to the Order, 2009, the appellant is entitled to redemption thereof on payment of appropriate Redemption Fine adjudged by the learned Additional Commissioner in terms of the provisions of Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. Redemption with the condition of re-export is very harsh penalty. - the adjudicating authority has travelled a bit too far in the matter & his order regarding re-export order of imported goods is arbitrary. The imposed goods are restricted but that does not mean that they cannot be allowed to be brought in India at all. Held that - The issue stands dealt by Commissioner (Appeals) in details and he has passed the impugned order by following the precedent decision of the Tribunal. As regards quantum of redemption fine, the Revenue has not shown as to how the quantum of redemption fine of ₹ 8 lakhs imposed on the appellant is on the lower side. Revenue has also not referred to margin of profit. I find that Commissioner (Appeals) adopted the same quantum of redemption fine as was imposed by the original adjudicating authority and has simplicitor converted the impugned order of re-export into home consumption for clearance. - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Import of goods without valid BIS Certification
2. Confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962
3. Imposition of redemption fine and penalty under Sections 125 and 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962
4. Appeal against the order of confiscation and imposition of fine

Issue 1: Import of goods without valid BIS Certification
The case involved an importer who filed a Bill of Entry seeking clearance for imported "New Passenger Car Radial Tyres of mixed sizes." The examination revealed that the goods matched the import documents, but the importer failed to provide a valid BIS Certification as required by the Pneumatic Tyres and Tubes for Automotive Vehicles (Quality Control) Order, 2009. The absence of BIS Certification rendered the imported goods liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 2: Confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962
The Adjudicating Authority ordered the confiscation of the goods due to non-compliance with the BIS Certification requirement. However, an option was given under Section 125(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, allowing the payment of a fine in lieu of confiscation for re-export. Additionally, a penalty was imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 3: Imposition of redemption fine and penalty under Sections 125 and 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962
The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the importer was entitled to redemption of the goods on payment of a redemption fine, considering that the import of Pneumatic tyres was not prohibited under relevant laws. The Commissioner found the original adjudicating authority's decision harsh and arbitrary, converting the order from re-export to clearance for home consumption at the same redemption fine.

Issue 4: Appeal against the order of confiscation and imposition of fine
The Revenue contested the validity of the BIS certificate and the quantum of the redemption fine. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the decision, stating that the redemption fine was appropriate and consistent with Tribunal precedents. The Revenue's appeal was rejected as the Commissioner's decision was found justified and in line with established practices.

In conclusion, the judgment upheld the confiscation of goods due to non-compliance with BIS Certification requirements, allowed for redemption on payment of a fine, and rejected the Revenue's appeal against the redemption fine and penalty imposed.