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 Confirms Customs Act Violations, Adjusts Penalties</h1> <h3>PK. BISWAL Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI</h3> PK. BISWAL Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI - 2005 (187) E.L.T. 62 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues Involved:Violation of Section 50 of the Customs Act, 1962; Confiscation of goods under Section 113(i) of the Customs Act, 1962; Imposition of penalties under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962.Violation of Section 50 of the Customs Act, 1962:The case involved Export Oriented Units (EOUs) in Surat, Gujarat, exporting scarves through ICD, Tughlakabad, New Delhi. The scarves were found to be of low quality, resembling cuttings from saree materials. The EOUs had obtained yarn on CT3 certificates without paying duty, which was meant for manufacturing scarves but was instead sold in the domestic market. The Customs authorities issued Show Cause Notices for incorrect entries on Shipping Bills, violating Section 50 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods under Section 113(i) for this violation but reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 5.00 lakhs to Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 4.00 lakhs to Rs. 40,000/- due to the actual value of the goods not exceeding Rs. 1.25 lakhs.Confiscation of goods under Section 113(i) of the Customs Act, 1962:The Tribunal confirmed the confiscation of the scarves for violating Section 50 of the Customs Act, 1962. It was established that the EOUs made incorrect entries on Shipping Bills, leading to the confiscation of goods under Section 113(i). The Tribunal upheld the confiscation order but reduced the redemption fine significantly, considering the actual value of the goods. The penalties imposed under Section 114 were also reduced from Rs. 2.00 lakhs to Rs. 25,000/- for each EOU and from Rs. 1.00 lakhs to Rs. 10,000/- for each Director, acknowledging that the excise duties evaded were promptly paid upon detection.Imposition of penalties under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962:In addition to the confiscation of goods, penalties were imposed under Section 114 on the EOUs and their Directors. The penalties were initially set at Rs. 2.00 lakhs for each EOU and Rs. 1.00 lakhs for each Director. However, the Tribunal reduced these penalties to Rs. 25,000/- for each EOU and Rs. 10,000/- for each Director, taking into account the immediate payment of evaded excise duties and the reduction in redemption fines. The penalties were upheld but adjusted based on the circumstances of the case.In conclusion, the Tribunal addressed the issues of violation of Section 50 of the Customs Act, 1962, confiscation of goods under Section 113(i), and imposition of penalties under Section 114 in the case involving EOUs exporting scarves. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods and penalties but significantly reduced the redemption fines and penalty amounts considering the actual value of the goods and the immediate payment of evaded duties upon detection.
TaxTMI 