2016 (7) TMI 223 - AT - Customs

Appeal partially successful: fines reduced, penalties decreased, upheld under Central Excise Rules

Karnawat International Pvt. Ltd. Versus C.C.E., Jaipur-II

Karnawat International Pvt. Ltd. Versus C.C.E., Jaipur-II - TMI Issues: Alleged diversion of imported goods, imposition of redemption fine, imposition of penalties under various sections, improper maintenance of recordsAlleged Diversion of Imported Goods:The appellant argued that the imported goods, after being polished, were exported without discrepancies in the stock record. However, the Revenue contended that there were lapses in stock records, discrepancies in physical examination, and diversion of imported material, leading to the export of only indigenous material. The Revenue alleged that the exports were not made from the imported marbles, resulting in a breach of import conditions and loss of revenue. The Hon'ble Madras High Court precedent was cited, stating that stock discrepancies could indicate clandestine removal of goods. The appellant failed to provide credible evidence to reconcile the stock discrepancy, shifting the burden of proof to them. The physical verification revealed a stock discrepancy that the appellant acknowledged, but failed to explain satisfactorily. Consequently, the adjudication order was upheld based on the evidence presented.Imposition of Redemption Fine:Regarding the redemption fine, since the goods were exported under bond, a redemption fine was deemed justifiable for misdeclaration. The value of the goods was considered, leading to the imposition of a redemption fine of Rs. 10 lakhs. However, the imposition of the fine was deemed to lack a proper basis, resulting in a reduction of the redemption fine to Rs. 10 lakhs by the appellate tribunal.Imposition of Penalties:Three penalties were imposed under different sections. The penalty under Section 114(iii) was initially set at Rs. 10 lakhs for attempting to export goods improperly. Despite the imposition of a redemption fine, this penalty was reduced to Rs. 4 lakhs. The penalty under Section 114 AA, initially at Rs. 5 lakhs for incorrect particulars furnished for exports, was reduced due to disproportionality but the exact reduced amount was not specified in the summary. The third penalty under Section 117, a residuary penalty, was reduced from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh. The penalty under Rule 27 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, for improper maintenance of records was upheld, denying relief to the appellant on this count.In conclusion, the redemption fine was reduced to Rs. 10 lakhs, penalties were reduced to Rs. 4 lakhs under Section 114(iii), an unspecified amount under Section 114 AA, and Rs. 1 lakh under Section 117. The penalty under Rule 27 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, was maintained. The appeal was allowed to the extent of the reductions in fines and penalties.