2024 (2) TMI 208 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Confirms Confiscation of Used Clothing for Missing Import License; Reduces Fines and Penalties to Align with Precedent.

Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata Versus M/s Dev Anand Batra

Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata Versus M/s Dev Anand Batra - TMI Issues:The issues involved in the judgment are the enhancement of declared value, imposition of redemption fine and penalty on imported old and used worn clothing, and the classification of goods under Tariff Item No.63090000.Enhancement of Declared Value:The respondent imported old and used worn clothing, which were completely fumigated and assessed after value enhancement. The declared value was increased from US$ 1.10 per kg to US$ 1.316 per kg. The Adjudicating Authority imposed redemption fine and penalty at the rate of 30% and 10% of the assessed value, which was later reduced to 10% and 5% respectively by the ld. Commissioner. The Tribunal observed that the redemption fine and penalty imposed were sufficient, based on a previous decision. Consequently, the impugned order was upheld, and the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.Classification under Tariff Item No.63090000:The goods, old and used worn clothing articles, were classified under Tariff Item No.63090000 of the First Schedule of the Act. It was noted that the import of goods under this tariff item is restricted, and import is allowed only against a valid specific license. Confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 was invoked for the import of 'old and serviceable garments' without the required import license as prescribed under the Foreign Trade Policy. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) but reduced the redemption fine to 10% and penalty to 5% of the assessed value, considering the failure to comply with licensing requirements.Judicial Observations:The Tribunal referred to a previous case where it was noted that confiscation under Section 111(d) was justified for the import of goods without the necessary license. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with licensing requirements and upheld the confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) while reducing the redemption fine and penalty. Despite some objections raised by the appellants, the Tribunal found the imposed redemption fine and penalty to be sufficient to meet the ends of justice. The impugned order was upheld, and the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.