2013 (12) TMI 1482 - HC - Customs

Appeal dismissed as no confiscation order under Customs Act for penalty. Legal ruling upheld, no costs awarded.

Commissioner Versus S. Chandrasekharan

The High Court dismissed the appeal against the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal's decision to set aside a penalty imposed on a party. ... Imposition of penalty - Whether the CESTAT, Bangalore was correct to set aside the penalty imposed on the party - Held that:- In order to impose penalty, there must be an order of confiscation. Learned Tribunal has correctly held so. Accordingly we dismiss the appeal, as we do not find any element of law involved to admit the appeal - Decided against Revenue. Issues involved:Admission of appeal against Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal's judgment setting aside a penalty.Analysis:The High Court was approached to admit an appeal against the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore, which set aside a penalty imposed on a party. The main question of law was whether the Tribunal was correct in its decision to annul the penalty. The High Court, however, chose to bypass this question and instead focused on examining the impugned judgment in light of the appellant's submissions. The Tribunal's decision was based on the absence of an order of confiscation, as required under Section 114 of the Customs Act for the imposition of a penalty. Section 114 outlines the penalties for various violations related to goods, specifying conditions under which penalties can be imposed. The Tribunal correctly interpreted that without an order of confiscation, the penalty could not be upheld. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal, stating that there was no legal basis to admit it, and no costs were awarded. Additionally, all interlocutory applications were closed following the dismissal of the appeal.