2023 (6) TMI 320 - AT - Customs

Confiscation - Reduction in quantum of redemption fine and penalty - import of old and used worn clothing, completely fumigated - restricted item or not - to be classified under Tariff Item No.63090000 of the First Schedule of the Act or not - HELD THAT - This issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of VENUS TRADERS, RAINBOW INTERNATIONAL, AL-YASEEN ENTERPRISES, GLOBE INTERNATIONAL, KRISHNA EXPORT CORPORATION, PRECISION IMPEX, BMC SPINNERS PVT. LTD., SHIVAM TRADERS, LEELA WOOLEN MILLS, M.U. TEXTILES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS) MUMBAI 2018 (11) TMI 625 - CESTAT MUMBAI , wherein this Tribunal has observed that The failure of the original authority to comply with the direction in remand to disclose the margin of profit that prompted the fine and penalty, the matter would normally have to be remitted back by another remand order. However, the paucity of evidence and the negligible scope for ascertainment at this stage deters us from doing so. The redemption fine and penalty imposed on the respondent to the tune of 10% 5% respectively on the assessed value is sufficient - there are no infirmity in the impugned order and the same is upheld - appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the enhancement of declared value of imported goods, imposition of redemption fine and penalty, classification of goods under restricted tariff item, and compliance with licensing requirements.

Enhancement of declared value:
The respondent imported old and used worn clothing, which were completely fumigated. The declared value was enhanced from US$ 1.05 per kg to US$ 1.316 per kg. The Adjudicating Authority imposed redemption fine and penalty due to the classification of the goods under Tariff Item No.63090000, which is a restricted item for import. The Tribunal observed that the invocation of Section 111(m) for confiscation does not conform with the law in the absence of a proper declaration. Confiscation under Section 111(d) was upheld for import of goods without the required license under the Foreign Trade Policy.

Imposition of redemption fine and penalty:
The Adjudicating Authority had imposed redemption fine and penalty at the rate of 30% and 10% respectively, which was later reduced to 10% and 5% by the Commissioner. The Tribunal, following a previous decision, upheld the confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal found that the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the respondent at 10% and 5% of the assessed value, respectively, were sufficient.

Compliance with licensing requirements:
The Tribunal noted the failure to comply with licensing requirements for the import of restricted goods under Tariff Item No.63090000. Despite the issues raised regarding the margin of profit and the validity of the market survey, the Tribunal did not find any serious resistance to the ascertained value. Due to the admitted failure to comply with licensing requirements, the confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) was upheld, while the redemption fine and penalty were reduced to 10% and 5% respectively.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue, upholding the impugned order. The redemption fine and penalty imposed on the respondent were deemed sufficient, and no infirmity was found in the impugned order.