9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1257X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of cargo. Therefore, it is difficult to believe the submissions of the appellant that they had no Knowledge of the misdeclaration of the cargo. We find that Learned Commissioner has found that the goods are misdeclared; the appellants having filed bill of entry have misdeclared the goods. The valuation adopted in the impugned order is arbitrary. The Learned Commissioner has not recorded any reason for rejecting the declared value in respect of 148 bales. He proceeded to redetermine the value of all the goods when the misdeclaration was only in respect of 81 bales. Commissioner proceeded to redetermine the entire quantity of goods without giving any reasons for rejecting the value of the goods. The impugned order does not refer to any Valu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nments consisting 229 bales, to the extent of 81 bales;81 bales were found to contain full pants and trousers in place of declared payjamas. Accordingly, the Department has seized the materials and issued a show-cause notice to the appellant proposing confiscation and imposition of penalties. Show-cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner vide Order-in- Original No.08/Cus/CC(P)/WB/2009 dated 06.03.2009, vide which, Commissioner confiscated the goods totally revaluated ₹ 38,09,430 and allowed redemption on payment of fine of ₹ 45,00,000; imposed penalty of ₹ 41,86,625/- on Shri Bikash Kumar Saha, Proprietor of the Appellant Company under Section 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 and penalty of ₹ 1,00,000 0n S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 81 bales consisted of full pants in place of Pajamas. The Learned Counsel has submitted a letter purported to have been sent by Fax from M/s Chandra Export, Kalampur, Bangladesh. The said letter dated 22.07.2008 mentions that due to electricity shut off, the goods were loaded under candle light and by mistake, some old and used garments have loaded. It does not mention that pants were loaded in place of pajamas. After perusing this letter, we find that the reason put forth by the Learned Counsel for the appellant, for importing full pants in place of indented pajamas, is not at all forthcoming from the said letter. The said letter does give any reason for the misdeclaration of 81 bales of cargo. Therefore, it is difficult to believe the sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... We find that the valuation declared by the appellant is to be accepted. However, it is required to redetermine the value of 81 bales in dispute, which were misdeclared. We find that the issue needs to go back to the adjudicating authority for proper appreciation of the Customs Valuation Rules and to redetermine the value accordingly. We find that the Learned Commissioner has imposed penalty on the appellant keeping in view the revised value of the entire goods, which are partly misdeclared. Such imposition of penalty has no basis of law. Therefore, we are inclined to reduce the penalty, imposable on the appellant, to be equivalent to the applicable duty payable on such redetermination of the value of 81 bales in question. Accordingly, we s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
