TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules on Customs Act confiscation of imported machines, adjusts penalties</h1> <h3>BRIJBASI ART PRESS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI</h3> BRIJBASI ART PRESS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI - 2002 (141) E.L.T. 543 (Tri. - Del.) Issues:1. Confiscation of imported machines under Customs Act.2. Interpretation of Exim Policy regarding import of old and used capital goods.3. Validity of confiscation and penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Customs.4. Consideration of machines manufactured over 10 years old.5. Reduction of redemption fine and penalty amounts.Analysis:1. The appeal challenged an order by the Commissioner of Customs confiscating five imported machines valued at Rs. 28,11,386 under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act and imposing a fine of Rs. 10,00,000 along with a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act.2. The appellants imported five machines, one of which was manufactured in 1979, exceeding the 10-year limit for import without a specific license. The remaining four machines were within the permissible limit under the Exim Policy. The Commissioner confiscated all five machines, leading to the appeal.3. The appellant's counsel argued that the confiscation of all five machines was unjustified as only one machine exceeded the 10-year limit. The counsel requested the release of the four machines covered by the Exim Policy on payment of duty, while accepting the confiscation of the one machine manufactured in 1979.4. The Departmental Representative contended that the intent to evade import regulations was evident as one machine exceeded the 10-year limit. The authorities justified the confiscation of all machines based on this premise, supported by the penalty and redemption fine imposed.5. The Tribunal noted that only one machine was over 10 years old, while the remaining four were within the permissible limit. The confiscation of the four machines was deemed irregular, and the order was set aside. However, the fifth machine exceeding the limit was rightfully confiscated, with the redemption fine reduced to Rs. 50,000. The penalty amount was also reduced to Rs. 25,000 considering only one machine was illegally imported. The four legally imported machines were permitted to be cleared on payment of duty, concluding the appeal.
TaxTMI 