Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (11) TMI 1230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d on 23-10-2013 both sides were heard accordingly. 2. The appellant herein is a steamer agent of M/s. MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A which carries on business as owners of shipping containers and also as carriers of international cargo and other ship-related business from its principal place of business at Geneva. Certain consignments of goods declared as 'Shredded Steel Scrap' were brought into India under Bills of Lading issued by the principals of the appellant and declarations were made in the Import General Manifest to the effect that the goods were 'Shredded Steel Scrap' and the weights of the content in each container was also declared. On examination of the goods in respect of 12 Bills of Lading issued by the principals inv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Customs Act with an option to redeem the goods on payment of a redemption fine of Rs.10 lakhs. Further, a penalty of Rs.90,15,924/- was imposed on the steamer agent under section 116 of the Customs Act for not making a true declaration in the import manifest and not having accounted for 3381.129 MTs of Shredded Steel Scrap and 162.71 MTS of Heavy Melting Scrap involving a total duty of Rs. 90,15,924/-. Proceedings against all the other parties were dropped. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner, the appellant has filed this appeal. 4. The Learned advocate for the appellant submits that under modern shipping trade practices, where containers are used to ship cargo, the steamer agents are responsible only to ensure that the seal put .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t shipment has happened at the time of shipment itself and it is not in the custody of the steamer line. There was no foul play by the steamer line or its agent to avoid customs duty payable in India. He also points out that, from the records of the case it comes out that supplier abroad had taken legal action against the sub-contractor. 7. In the matter of law that is applicable to the situation, he points out that section 116 of the Customs Act was incorporated in the Act during a time when containerized mode of transportation was not in vogue. Subsequently, when the containerized mode of shipment became the predominant mode of transportation, the applicability of section 116 became a matter of litigation. The Hon. Bombay High Court had .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ip owner about the exact number of bags, tins or containers being shipped. But in so far as the weight, contents and value are concerned, if there is an endorsement that they are not known or if there is a qualifying remark indicating that the master of the vessel has entered those particulars in the bills of lading in accordance with the figures given to him by the shipper or consignor, then the statements in the bills of lading regarding those particulars would not be binding on the ship owner and it will be for the shipper or consignor to prove that the consignments loaded on board the ship were of the same weight and the contents were of the same nature and the value was of the same figure as those noted in the bills of lading. The hypo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the goods found short which the consignees were claiming from the steamer lines. The argument of the Counsel for appellant is that if it is decided that steamer agents cannot be held liable to pay the value of goods found short, there cannot be any reason to hold them liable to pay customs duty. For this reason, he is relying on the said decisions also. 9. Opposing the pleading of the Ld Advocate the Ld. A. R. for Revenue reiterates arguments given in para 44.2 and 44.3 of the adjudication order. She further submits that this is a case where 150 containers were shipped through the same shipping line and in all cases the actual weight of goods were just about almost 12.5% (on an average) of the declared weight of the goods as per the Bi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates