2019 (12) TMI 897 - HC - Customs

Levy of redemption fine and penalty - export of Cow Crunch Upper Finished Leather - DGFT Public Notice dated 27.5.1992 - retesting sought after a long period - HELD THAT - Rejection of the prayer for retesting after a long period on the part by the Tribunal cannot be faulted. Even though the Assessee obtained a Report from the same Institute on 22.10.2009, the product description shown in that Report viz., Cow Lining Leather Colour OLIVE (KISSEL)(IV)(1) is also not the same as the export of the goods in question which is subject matter of the present case viz., 'Finished Leather'. The Report dated 16.10.2009 relied upon by the Revenue, gives the description of the sample is Cow Softy Upper Leather (Crunch) Colour OLIVE (VI)(1)(E) . A mere difference of description of the goods in these two Reports given by the CLRI itself, as obtained by the Revenue and Assessee, cannot be fatal to the reliance placed by the Revenue on the said Report dated 16.10.2009 which pertained to the confiscated goods only. There are no force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the Assessee that on the basis of the report adduced by the Assessee before the Tribunal vide dated 22.10.2009, though obtained shortly after the report dated 16.10.2009, the Tribunal was required to direct a retest. Obviously the sample goods sent by the Assessee for testing was not from the lot of the goods exported or goods confiscated by the Revenue in question. Therefore, obviously the report obtained by the Revenue Authorities from the sample taken from the confiscated export goods vide Report dated 16.10.2009, was more reliable rather than the Report dated 22.10.2009 produced by the Assessee. Rejection of the prayer by the learned Tribunal for retesting of the sample in question, especially after a long period of about 9 years was justified - Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order upholding redemption fine and penalty on Shipping Bills for export of leather. Dispute over CLRI reports and retesting.

Analysis:
1. The Assessee appealed against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal upholding redemption fine and penalty on Shipping Bills for exporting "Cow Crunch Upper Finished Leather." The Tribunal relied on a Public Notice detailing testing requirements for leather types.

2. The Assessee's counsel argued that the CLRI report did not match the export description, questioning the duty levy. The Assessee obtained a favorable CLRI report later. The Tribunal rejected retesting pleas due to time lapse, disposing of samples, and potential changes in samples over time.

3. The Revenue's counsel defended the CLRI report, emphasizing proper sample collection. The Tribunal found the CLRI report credible, justifying the imposed fine and penalty. The Assessee's retesting request after a decade was deemed unwarranted.

4. The High Court found the rejection of retesting reasonable, despite differing CLRI reports. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the reliability of the Revenue's CLRI report over the Assessee's report. The Court dismissed the Appeals and related petitions, affirming the imposed fine and penalty.