TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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 upholds revenue appeal rejection, disposes of stay petition.</h1> The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, rejecting the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Stay Petition was also disposed of in light of the decision. - TMI Valuation of imported goods - used and worn unmutilated and fumigated mix cloth - violation of Import Trade Control restrictions - Confiscation - redemption fine - penalty - HELD THAT:- The enhancement of value has been ordered by the First Appellate Authority on the basis of concurrence given by the importer for such enhancement. There is no challenge to the order of confiscation, but Revenue is challenging the quantum of redemption fine and penalty, which stand reduced by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has ordered reduction of redemption fine and personal penalty on the basis of ratio laid down by the Three Member Bench of CESTAT, Delhi in the case of M/S. OMEX INTERNATIONAL VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI [2015 (4) TMI 112 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB)]. The Three Member Bench has taken the view that redemption fine of 10% and penalty of 5% of the value of the imported goods, would be appropriate in case of import violating Exim Policy Provisions - the quantum of redemption fine and penalty reduced. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. Issues: Condonation of delay in filing appeal, enhancement of value of imported goods, challenge to reduction of redemption fine and penalty, appropriate quantum of redemption fine and penalty.Condonation of Delay: The Appellant filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The delay was condoned based on reasons provided in the application, and the Miscellaneous Application was allowed.Enhancement of Value of Imported Goods: The respondent imported used and worn unmutilated and fumigated mix cloth, with the declared value of the goods being enhanced during original assessment. The original adjudicating authority ordered confiscation of the goods for violation of Import Trade Control restrictions, along with imposing redemption fine and personal penalty under relevant sections of the Customs Act, 1962.Challenge to Reduction of Redemption Fine and Penalty: The order of the First Appellate Authority upholding confiscation and value enhancement was challenged by the Revenue. The Revenue sought review of the reduction of redemption fine and personal penalty imposed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), arguing for an increase in these penalties to act as a deterrent for repeated violations.Appropriate Quantum of Redemption Fine and Penalty: The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the redemption fine and personal penalty based on a precedent set by a Three Member Bench of CESTAT, Delhi. The Bench had established that a redemption fine of 10% and penalty of 5% of the value of imported goods would be suitable in cases of import violations, following Exim Policy Provisions. The Tribunal upheld this decision, citing no reason to interfere with the Commissioner's findings based on the precedent.Conclusion: The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, rejecting the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Stay Petition was also disposed of in light of the decision.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
