2019 (12) TMI 571 - AT - Customs

Tribunal upholds confiscation of excess goods, sets aside confiscation of correctly declared items, reduces fines.

Shri Bikash Saha, Proprietor M/s. Bishal Export and Shri Jhunu Dutta, Proprietor M/s. Dutta Enterprise Versus Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Kolkata

Shri Bikash Saha, Proprietor M/s. Bishal Export and Shri Jhunu Dutta, Proprietor M/s. Dutta Enterprise Versus Principal Commissioner of Customs ... Issues:1. Confiscation of imported goods under Customs Act, 1962.2. Imposition of redemption fine and penalties.3. Applicability of South Asia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) exemption.4. Correct interpretation of Section 111(e) and 111(l) of the Customs Act.Analysis:1. The appellants imported readymade garments from Bangladesh under the SAFTA exemption. However, discrepancies were found between the declared quantity in Bills of Entry and the actual imported quantity. The adjudicating authority confiscated the entire consignment under Sections 111(e) and 111(l) of the Customs Act, 1962, and imposed redemption fine, duty, and penalties.2. The appellants argued that only the excess goods not covered by the SAFTA certificate should be subject to confiscation and duty. They contended that correctly declared goods should not be confiscated, and redemption fines and penalties should only apply to the excess quantity. The authorized representative for the department supported the impugned order.3. The Tribunal observed that the Customs Act allows confiscation of goods not declared or in excess. The SAFTA certificate covered the declared quantity, making only the excess goods liable for confiscation. The Tribunal held that only the excess quantity of goods, such as additional trousers and shorts, should be confiscated, not the entire consignment. The denial of exemption for goods covered by the SAFTA certificate was deemed incorrect.4. The Tribunal ruled that Section 111(e) and 111(l) of the Customs Act apply to concealed or undeclared goods, not the entire consignment. Therefore, only the excess goods, like extra T-shirts and shorts, were subject to confiscation. The remaining goods were not supported by law for confiscation. The demands for duty, fines, and penalties were set aside for the correctly declared goods covered by the SAFTA certificate.5. The appeals were partly allowed, upholding confiscation of excess goods and duty on those items. The confiscation of the remaining goods was set aside. The redemption fine and penalties imposed were proportionately reduced. The matters were remanded for recalculation of duty, fine, and penalty by the original authority.