TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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 reduces redemption fine and penalty under Customs Act, considering cargo's perishable nature.</h1> <h3>M/s. Naam Exports Versus Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin</h3> M/s. Naam Exports Versus Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin - 2022 (382) E.L.T. 251 (Tri. - Chennai) Issues:1. Redetermination of value of exported goods2. Confiscation of goods under Customs Act, 19623. Imposition of redemption fine and penalties4. Contest regarding redemption fine and penaltiesAnalysis:1. The appellant exported big onions to Sri Lanka, declaring a total FOB value and claiming drawback. However, upon examination, it was discovered that the actual weight of the cargo exceeded the declared weight significantly. The authorities seized the entire cargo under mahazar on the suspicion of misdeclaration, leading to the redetermination of the value of the goods.2. The adjudicating authority, under the Customs Act, 1962, rejected the declared value, redetermined the value of the goods, and ordered for confiscation with an option for redemption on payment of a fine. The appellant contested the redemption fine and penalties imposed, arguing that the excess quantity was loaded due to the perishable nature of onions to compensate for weight loss during transit.3. The appellant's counsel contended that no monetary benefit was derived from the excess quantity, and the penalties imposed were excessive and disproportionate to the situation. The appellant requested leniency, highlighting that the penalties did not consider the lack of extra profit gained from the misdeclaration.4. The tribunal acknowledged the misdeclaration of goods by the appellant but considered the nature of the cargo, being perishable, in determining the appropriate redemption fine. The tribunal reduced the redemption fine significantly, recognizing the minimal profit margin in perishable goods and the lack of proven intentional false declarations by the appellant. Consequently, the tribunal modified the impugned order by reducing the redemption fine and setting aside the penalty imposed under a specific section of the Customs Act, partially allowing the appeal.
TaxTMI 