9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 439X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble to the importers only and the fact that whether the money for the said deposits were provided by the exporters or not, would make no difference. Section 27 of the Customs Act which relates to the refund of any duty and interest paid by an assessee, in terms of an order of assessment relates to payment of duty and interest only and does not cover the redemption fine and penalties. As such even if the redemption fine and penalty amounts were provided by the appellant to the various importers for further deposit of the same with the Revenue, it has to be considered as an internal arrangement between the exporter and importers and filing of the refund of the same by the exporter, even though the amounts were deposited by the importers, cannot be held to be justifiable inasmuch as there is no provision in the Customs Act to find out as to who has actually provided money to the person depositing the same. The law recognizes only the importers and by setting aside the redemption fine and penalties imposed upon them, it is the importers only who are recognized by law for the purpose of refund of the amounts in question. Therefore, no reason to interfere in the impugned orders. - Dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing re-export of the goods, he imposed redemption fine and penalties on various importers to the extent as detailed in the order. As per the appellant, inasmuch as the redemption fine and penalties were imposed upon the importers even though the appellant was held to be owner of the goods, such penalties and redemption fines were deposited by the respective importers out of the money sent by them from Dubai by way of Demand Draft issued by the Standard Chartered Bank to the various importers. 5. The said order of the Commissioner was challenged by the appellant before the Tribunal, who vide their Final Order No. 953-964/2006, dated 23-5-2006 [2006 (205) E.L.T. 1041 (Tribunal)] set aside the same and held that the confiscation ordered by the Commissioner and consequent fine and penalties were not sustainable. The said order of the Tribunal was confirmed by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka vide its order dated 3-8-2011 [2012 (275) E.L.T. A18 (Kar.)], when the appeals filed by the Revenue were rejected. 6. As a result of passing of the said Final Order, the importers became entitled to the redemption fine and penalties deposited by them. The dispute in the present matter st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant i.e. the exporter of the goods, has clearly observed that he continues to be the owner of the entire consignment inasmuch as importers have not paid him. It was in these circumstances, he allowed the appellant to re-export the cargo. Though the said findings of the Commissioner are in line with the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court, in the case of UOI v. Sampat Raj Dugar [1992 (58) E.L.T. 163 (S.C.)] holding that where the importer of the goods does not pay for the goods and abandons the same, the exporter continues to be the owner of the goods and is entitled to ask for their re-export, the Commissioner had erred in imposing redemption fine and penalties on the importers. Such option to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine should have been given only to the owner of the goods, in terms of the provisions of Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. It was in these circumstances that the importers refused to pay redemption fine and penalties and inasmuch as the cargo was to be re-exported by the appellant, the said redemption fines and penalties were deposited by the appellant only through the 11 importers. He further submits that inasmuch it is the appellant who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there any provision under the Customs Act or under the Central Excise Act providing for recovery of fine and penalty from another person. If that be so, the refund of such fine and penalty on success of the appeal cannot be granted to any other person who has not deposited the same. In the present cse, fine and penalty was paid by the importers separately by way of individual TR-6 challans and the internal arrangement between the importers and the exporter of the goods cannot be taken into consideration while deciding the refund claims of the same in terms of the Tribunal s order. The appeals stand filed against the earlier order, by the individual importers with a prayer to refund the redemption fine and penalty paid by them for re-export of the goods. On success of their appeals, the fine and penalties so deposited by them can be refunded only to the importers who have deposited the same and not to the exporter of the goods. 11. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. The facts of the case are clear and there is no dispute about the earlier order-in-original imposing redemption fine and penalty and the same having been set aside by the Tribunal. The question wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present case, we note that the order was passed against the importers (whether right or wrong) and the redemption fine and penalties were deposited by the importers by various TR-6 Challans in their name and the appeals were also filed by the importers before the Tribunal. Even before the Tribunal, the appellant never took a stand that redemption fine and penalties should not have been imposed upon them and the same should have been directed towards exporter of the goods. The appeal stands allowed on the merits of the case only. In such a scenario, the refund arising out of the said order of the Tribunal would be available to the importers only and the fact that whether the money for the said deposits were provided by the exporters or not, in our view, would make no difference. 14. We also note that Section 27 of the Customs Act which relates to the refund of any duty and interest paid by an assessee, in terms of an order of assessment relates to payment of duty and interest only and does not cover the redemption fine and penalties. As such even if the redemption fine and penalty amounts were provided by the appellant to the various importers for further deposit of the same wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
