2016 (8) TMI 137 - AT - Customs

Confiscation of import of vehicle - import of mobile concrete pump placer boom pump of 120 Cu. MT capacity mounted on Volvo Chasis. - The appellant claimed the classification of the product under CTH 8705 and claimed the benefit of notification No. 21/2002 Sr. No. 230, List No. 18(Item No. 17). - Held that - in view of facts and circumstances of the case there is no malafide intention on the part of the appellant. They only made their claim for change of classification even though in the bill of entry they initially classified the goods under CTH 8705. We are of the view that merely because the appellant claimed such classification it cannot be tantamount to mis-declaration. The only implication in case of CTH 8705, Homologation certificate has to be produced and in other classification the same is not required. The whole issue gets boiled down to the point that even if it is presumed that the goods is classified under CTH 8705 the only lapse on the part of the appellant is that they have not produced Homologation certificate. It is also observed that the claim of the appellant of classification under CTH 8413 does not benefit them in respect of custom duty, for the reason that the goods falling under CTH 8705 or 8413, both are eligible for exemption notification No. 21/2002-Cus. Redemption fine and penalty imposed by the Adjudicating authority require reduction. Since we are deciding only quantum of redemption fine and penalty, we are not addressing legal issue of classification of the goods therefore the same is kept open. - Decided partly in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Classification of imported goods under Customs Act, 1962; Confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of Customs Act, 1962; Redemption of goods under Section 125 of Customs Act, 1962; Penalty under Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962.

Classification of Imported Goods: The appellant imported a mobile concrete pump and claimed its classification under CTH 8705 for duty exemption. The appellant also requested classification under CTH 8413 based on the end-use application of the concrete pump. The Adjudicating authority observed that the equipment was covered under CTH 8705, leading to confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant's failure to produce a homologation certificate for CTH 8705 was noted. However, the Tribunal found that the goods, whether classified under 8705 or 8413, were eligible for exemption under notification No. 21/2002-Cus as long as the end-use condition was met.

Confiscation and Redemption: The Commissioner ordered confiscation of the imported vehicle under Section 111(d) but allowed redemption under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 on payment of a fine of ?5,00,000. The appellant argued that the end-use application for highway construction made the goods eligible for exemption, regardless of the classification. The Tribunal acknowledged the lack of malafide intention on the appellant's part and reduced the redemption fine to ?1,00,000 and the penalty to ?10,000, emphasizing that the issue of classification was not being addressed in the reduction.

Penalty Imposed: The penalty of ?50,000 imposed on the importer under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 was also reduced to ?10,000 by the Tribunal. The reduction was based on the overall facts and circumstances of the case, with the Tribunal noting that the appellant's claim for a change in classification did not amount to mis-declaration. The Tribunal emphasized that the reduction in penalty and fine was based on the specific quantum and did not address the legal issue of classification, which was kept open for future consideration.