Customs procedure breach made imported PTA liable to confiscation, and lack of revenue loss did not prevent penalty.

Imported non-duty-paid PTA consumed directly after clearance under bond, without warehousing, re-warehousing, ex-bonding or permission of the proper officer, was treated as removal in breach of Customs procedure and therefore liable to confiscation under Section 111(j) of the Customs Act. Confiscation under Section 120 followed once the goods were so liable. The absence of revenue loss and the claim of no intention to evade duty did not affect confiscability on these admitted facts, and the confiscation and penalty were sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether imported non-duty-paid PTA, used without following the warehousing procedure and without permission of the proper officer, was liable to confiscation and penalty.

Analysis: The material was admittedly imported under bond but was directly unloaded and consumed without warehousing, re-warehousing, or ex-bonding. On those admitted facts, the goods were removed and used in breach of the Customs procedure, attracting Section 111(j) of the Customs Act. Once the goods were liable to confiscation under that provision, confiscation under Section 120 also followed. The absence of revenue loss and the plea of no intention to evade duty did not affect the confiscability of the goods on these facts.

Conclusion: The confiscation and penalty were sustained against the assessee.

---