2019 (11) TMI 190 - AT - Customs

Imposition of redemption fine and penalty - Classification of imported goods - Brass Scrap Ebony - HELD THAT - The duty demand involved in the present appeal is around ₹ 1.38 Lacs. Considering the quantum of differential duty confirmed by the department, we are of the view that the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the appellant can be reduced in the interest of justice. The impugned order is modified to the extent of reducing the redemption fine from ₹ 2,00,000/- to ₹ 50,000/- and the quantum of penalty from ₹ 50,000/- to ₹ 20,000/-, which should be deposited by the appellant - Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of imported goods under the Customs Tariff Heading, imposition of redemption fine, imposition of penalty.

Classification of Imported Goods:
The appellant filed a bill of entry for clearance of "Brass Scrap Ebony" under CTH 74040012. Upon physical examination, it was found that the goods were predominantly copper. The Deputy Chief Chemist's report confirmed copper, zinc, and nickel content. The department reclassified the goods under CTH 74040029, determining the value at &8377; 24,15,654/-. The appellant's classification was changed to 74400012, leading to confiscation under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudged dues against the appellant.

Imposition of Redemption Fine and Penalty:
The appellant argued that the customs duty demand was already paid, focusing on the redemption fine and penalty. The duty demand in question was approximately &8377; 1.38 Lacs. The tribunal considered reducing the redemption fine and penalty due to the quantum of differential duty confirmed. The redemption fine was reduced from &8377; 2,00,000/- to &8377; 50,000/-, and the penalty was reduced from &8377; 50,000/- to &8377; 20,000/-. The modified order required the appellant to deposit the revised penalty amount.

Conclusion:
The tribunal modified the impugned order, reducing the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the appellant. The appellant was directed to deposit the revised penalty amount. The appeal was disposed of based on the modifications made by the tribunal in the interest of justice.