9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (4) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay fine of Rs. 30,000/- and also the confiscation of 290 kgs. of copper scrap found in excess with option to pay fine of Rs. 15,000/- (which was reduced to Rs. 10,000/-) and he has set aside the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- imposed on the appellants. 2. The appellants imported copper scrap and claimed clearance under OGL. The clearance was objected to, on the ground that the copper pipes were of the measurement of 60 cm in length and could not fall within the definition of the word scrap . The consignment was also found more in weight to the extent of 290 kgs. The adjudicating authority however held the entire consignment as also 290 kgs. of excess liable to confiscation. During the course of the adjudication proceedings the appellants volunt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is excess was declared, the same would have been cleared. There was no mala fide in importing this excess which is a normal phenomena in the import of scrap. He has also submitted that there could be no act of misdeclaration inasmuch as they have declared the weight as was communicated to them by the suppliers by way of invoice and packing list supplied to them. He has therefore submitted that the order of confiscation to the extent of 290 kgs. is not sustainable. 4. Shri Harnek Singh, the ld. JDR, however, has submitted that so far as 5 M.T. of scrap is concerned, at the time of importation, the same did not satisfy the requirement of the scrap. Subsequent mutilation would not exonerate the appellant from the liability to confiscation. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t there could be no mala fide in finding the excess to this extent. All the same it remains as the excess and not declared in the Bill of Entry filed. Mala fide or otherwise would be a ground for considering whether personal penalty under Sec. 112 of the Customs Act should be imposed or not but the goods being excess to the declaration, it becomes liable to confiscation. However, considering the duty element involved, as also in the absence of mala fide on the part of the appellants, this appears to be a just case where for an unintentional lapse a strict action ought not be taken. Therefore, while sustaining the order of confiscation, the redemption fine is further reduced to Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One thousand only). With this modification th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
