Tribunal confirms goods confiscation in license fraud case, reduces penalty on appellant

The Tribunal confirmed the absolute confiscation of goods imported against cancelled licences due to fraud. The appellant, alleged to have colluded in obtaining and selling the licences, argued being a bona fide purchaser. Citing legal precedents, the appellant contested liability for penalty. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation, deeming the licences non-existent. While acknowledging collusion, the penalty was reduced from Rs. 20.00 lacs to Rs. 5.00 lacs, emphasizing import without a valid licence as the basis. The appeal was partially allowed, reducing the penalty imposed on the appellant.

---

---

Issues:
1. Import of goods against cancelled licences.
2. Liability of penalty on the appellant.

Analysis:
1. The appellant imported goods against two REP import licences issued to a non-existent firm, Overseas Enterprises, which were later cancelled due to fraud and misrepresentation. Customs found that the appellant, as the purported transferee of the licences, colluded in obtaining and selling them. The Collector ordered the absolute confiscation of the goods and imposed a penalty of Rs. 20.00 lacs on the appellant. The appellant argued that the imports were made before the licence cancellation and claimed to be a bona fide purchaser of the licences, thus not liable for penalty.

2. The appellant's advocate cited legal precedents to support their contention, including judgments from the Supreme Court and the Tribunal. The departmental representative emphasized that the licences were obtained through fraudulent means, referencing relevant legal cases. The Tribunal analyzed the legal position based on precedents, stating that a licence obtained by fraud may be avoidable but remains valid until voided as per the law. The Tribunal confirmed the confiscation of the goods as the licences were deemed non-existent due to the non-existence of Overseas Enterprises, the licensee.

3. Regarding the liability of penalty on the appellant, the Collector highlighted various aspects indicating collusion in obtaining the licences. The appellant failed to provide satisfactory explanations and evidence regarding the transactions and payments related to the licences. The Tribunal considered these factors and reduced the penalty imposed on the appellant to Rs. 5.00 lacs, emphasizing the import of goods without a valid licence as the basis for the penalty. The Tribunal's decision partially allowed the appeal, reducing the penalty amount imposed on the appellant.

---