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

2008 (4) TMI 310

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... anarthana Raja, JJ. Shri T. Chandrasekaran, SCCG, for the Appellant. [Judgment per: K. Raviraja Pandian, J.]. - In all these cases, the Revenue is on appeal under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 against the Final Order Nos. 677, 676 and 678 of 2007 respectively dated 28-5-2007 on the file of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai. 2. The material facts for disposal of these appeals are as follows: The first respondent-importers have imported old used photocopiers and filed bills of entry for clearance of the goods under OGL. The value of the goods as invoiced by the Overseas Supplier was declared in bills of entry. These imports were made subsequent to the amendment of Para 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Customs in respect of confiscation of the goods, however reduced the redemption of fine and penalty to15 per cent and 5 per cent respectively of the value of the goods. The Department aggrieved by the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in reducing the penalty as stated above, filed the present appeals by formulating the following common questions of law: (i) Whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in reducing the redemption fine imposed under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 without giving any reasons, when the adjudicating authority imposes deterrent fine in order to stop the i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ial on record. 7. Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 reads as follows: "Section 125: Option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation : (1) Whenever confiscation of any goods is authorised by this Act, the officer adjudging it may, in the case of any goods, the importation or exportation whereof is prohibited under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force, and shall, in the case of any other goods, give to the owner of the goods or, where such owner is not known, the person from whose possession or custody such goods have been seized, an option to pay in lieu of confiscation such fine as the said officer thinks fit: Provided that, without prejudice to the provisions of the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 115, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s, whichever is the greater; (iii) in the case of goods in respect of which the value stated in the entry made under this Act or in the case of baggage, in the declaration made under section 77 (in either case hereinafter in this section referred to as the declared value) is higher than the value thereof, to a penalty not exceeding the difference between the declared value and the value thereof or five thousand rupees, whichever is the greater; (iv) in the case of goods falling both under clauses (i) and (iii), to a penalty not exceeding the value of the goods or the difference between the declared value and the value thereof or five thousand rupees, whichever is the highest; (v) in the case of goods falling both under clauses (ii) an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unal in the case of Sri Venkatesh Enterprises v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai - 2005 (192) E.L.T. 818, wherein the quantum of redemption fine imposed in lieu of confiscation of second-hand photocopiers valued at Rs.17.7 lakhs was restricted to Rs. 2.5 lakhs and the quantum of penalty was restricted to Rs. 85,000/-. The same was followed in the case of the respondents also by the Tribunal. The fixation of the quantum of redemption is an exercise of discretionary jurisdiction of the authorities under the Customs Act. The Court can interfere only in the circumstances in which it was demonstrated before it that the order of the Tribunal is thoroughly arbitrary, whimsical and resulting in miscarriage of justice. As already stated, the Tr .....

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