Tribunal upholds confiscation of goods worth Rs. 2,66,273 for MRP violation under Customs Act

The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods valued at Rs. 2,66,273 for clearance without affixing MRP stickers, under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant's argument that MRP was declared in the Bill of Entry was dismissed, as the Foreign Trade Policy required MRP declaration on individual packages. The imposed redemption fine of Rs. 1 lakh and penalty of Rs. 50,000 under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 were deemed reasonable, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues:
1. Alleged clearance of goods without affixing MRP stickers.
2. Confiscation of goods under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962.
3. Imposition of redemption fine and penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.
4. Contravention of provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy.

Issue 1: Alleged clearance of goods without affixing MRP stickers
The appellant imported various consumable items in retail packs for sale to consumers. The goods were cleared under a Bill of Entry, declaring the MRP for assessment of Additional Customs Duty. However, the jurisdictional Customs authorities found the goods without MRP stickers, alleging clearance without affixing MRP, leading to seizure under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 2: Confiscation of goods under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962
The Additional Commissioner ordered confiscation of the goods, valuing them at Rs. 2,66,273, due to the absence of MRP stickers. The appellant was directed to pay a redemption fine of Rs. 1 lakh and a penalty of Rs. 50,000 under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the confiscation but reduced the redemption fine and penalty.

Issue 3: Imposition of redemption fine and penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962
The appellant argued that the MRP was declared in the Bill of Entry, and thus, no contravention occurred. However, it was contended that as per the Foreign Trade Policy, MRP should be declared on individual packages. The Departmental Representative defended the confiscation, citing the contravention of Import Trade Policy provisions.

Issue 4: Contravention of provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy
The General Notes of the Foreign Trade Policy require the declaration of MRP on each package for goods subject to the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976. The absence of MRP stickers on the packages led to the conclusion that the Import Trade Policy provisions were contravened, justifying the confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no infirmity in the impugned order. The failure to declare MRP on individual packages contravened the Import Trade Policy, justifying the confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The redemption fine and penalty imposed were deemed reasonable, upholding the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals).

---