2023 (12) TMI 1020 - AT - Customs

Non-imposition of penalty under section 114A of CA - not demanding interest from the respondent - HELD THAT - The adjudicating authority has held that the goods are liable for confiscation and imposed redemption fine and penalty under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. Further, the adjudicating authority has relied on the judicial pronouncement of this Tribunal in the case of S.S.Impex where redemption fine was imposed @ 19.5% and penalty @ 7.8% on the value re-fixed. There are no infirmity in the impugned order and the same is upheld - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Appeal against non-imposition of penalty u/s 114A and non-demanding of interest from the respondent.

Details of the Judgment:

*Issue 1: Non-imposition of penalty u/s 114A and non-demanding of interest from the respondent*

The case involved the clearance of high-value 'worn clothing' through Custom House, Kolkata at their lowest value, leading to the initiation of proceedings against the respondent. The adjudicating authority confirmed duty, imposed a redemption fine, and a penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The goods were held liable for confiscation, and the assessable value was re-determined. The authority also ordered confiscation of the goods and gave an option to redeem them on payment of a fine. The Revenue contended that interest and penalty u/s 114(a) were not demanded from the respondent. However, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order, stating that the adjudicating authority had followed a previous judicial pronouncement and imposed the redemption fine and penalty accordingly. As there was no infirmity in the impugned order, the appeal was dismissed.

This judgment highlights the importance of following judicial pronouncements in determining penalties and fines under the Customs Act, 1962. It also underscores the authority's discretion in imposing penalties based on the circumstances of each case.

*End of Summary*