Tribunal Overturns Customs Confiscation Order Due to Minimal Weight Discrepancy

The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original confiscating marble blocks imported by the appellant under Sections 111(m) and 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal found the weight discrepancy to be minimal and irrelevant for customs purposes, especially considering the appellant's obligation as an EOU to re-export the goods. The proceedings were deemed unwarranted due to misapplication of criteria, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal against Order-in-Original confiscating marble blocks under Sections 111(m) and 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Summary:
The appeal was directed against an Order-in-Original confiscating marble blocks imported by the appellant under Sections 111(m) and 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Tughlakabad, New Delhi confiscated the goods and imposed a fine and penalty on the appellant. The appellant contended that the proceedings were contrary to facts and legal provisions, as the transaction was based on volume, not weight. The appellant, being an EOU, was obligated to re-export the goods, making the weight discrepancy irrelevant for customs purposes. The Tribunal noted that the weight difference was minimal, similar to a previous case where such differences were condoned. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, stating that the proceedings were unwarranted due to the misapplication of criteria, and allowed the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant.

---