TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the re-imported diamond-studded gold jewellery, not brought back within the prescribed time and without any extension, was liable to confiscation and redemption fine; (ii) whether the penalty imposed on the importer warranted reduction.
Issue (i): whether the re-imported diamond-studded gold jewellery, not brought back within the prescribed time and without any extension, was liable to confiscation and redemption fine.
Analysis: The goods were exported for exhibition and were required to be re-imported within the time limit prescribed under the applicable trade policy and procedure. The admitted delay in re-importation was not regularised by any relaxation from the competent authority. On that basis, the conditions governing re-import were not satisfied, attracting confiscability under the Customs law. The redemption fine imposed was also assessed as fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
Conclusion: The confiscation of the goods and the redemption fine were upheld and no interference was called for on this issue, against the assessee.
Issue (ii): whether the penalty imposed on the importer warranted reduction.
Analysis: Although liability to penal action followed from the breach of the prescribed re-import conditions, the facts and circumstances justified some further leniency in the quantum of penalty.
Conclusion: The penalty was reduced from Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 50,000 in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The order of confiscation and redemption fine was sustained, but the penalty was reduced, so the appeal succeeded only to that limited extent.
Ratio Decidendi: Goods re-imported beyond the prescribed time without competent relaxation remain liable to confiscation, while the quantum of penalty may be moderated on the facts.
TaxTMI 
