9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1336X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant. It is found that though there was a technical breach of the Act and Rules there was no intention to evade payment of duty. Nor was the appellant involved in any fraudulent activity that invited harsh penalties. The goods were also statedly exempt from payment of duty as per Notification 12/2012, as the vessel carrying a foreign flag was registered in India during its contract period as per the tender conditions issued by the Directorate of Shipping. Confiscation of goods - imposition of a personal penalty - HELD THAT:- Confiscation of goods and imposition of a personal penalty is meant to be remedial and hence coercive in its nature so as to serve as a deterrent. It can be imposed for a tax delinquency. However, the amounts imposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .70. Besides on verification with the freight certificate the consignment was found to be weighing 41 kilograms which was confirmed by the appellant. The appellant requested for waiving the Show Cause Notice and vide Order in Original dt 07/03/2014, the original authority confiscated the goods with an option for redemption on payment of fine and imposed penalties under sec. 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), who vide the order impugned herein upheld the same. Hence the present appeal. 3. I have heard learned counsel Shri N. Viswanathan for the appellant and Shri R. Rajaraman, learned Authorized Representative for the respondent. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the goods and submitted the same to the adjudicating authority apart from explaining the true facts involved. However, the original authority held them guilty of mis-declaration of the value for the goods and confiscated the same under Sec. 111 [m] of the Customs Act after enhancing its value. Redemption of the goods was permitted on payment of a fine of around 50% of the value apart from imposing the penalties under Sec. 112 [a] and 14 AA of the Customs Act. The appeal filed by them was rejected by the 1st Appellate Authority. Hence this appeal. He stated that the import is admittedly of ship spares required for the repair of an ocean-going vessel registered in India during an emergency due to which certain procedural deviations may ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rgent repairs. When Customs asked for a commercial invoice the same was subsequently submitted by the appellant. I find that though there was a technical breach of the Act and Rules there was no intention to evade payment of duty. Nor was the appellant involved in any fraudulent activity that invited harsh penalties. The goods were also statedly exempt from payment of duty as per Notification 12/2012, as the vessel carrying a foreign flag was registered in India during its contract period as per the tender conditions issued by the Directorate of Shipping. 5. Confiscation of goods and imposition of a personal penalty is meant to be remedial and hence coercive in its nature so as to serve as a deterrent. It can be imposed for a tax delinquenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
