TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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 Permits Re-export of Areca Nuts with Fine; Conditions Include No Re-import and Prompt Compliance by Revenue.</h1> The Tribunal allowed the appellants to re-export the confiscated areca nut consignments, initially deemed unfit and falsely declared as Sri Lankan origin, ... Permission to re-export the goods - absolute confiscation - penalty - HELD THAT:- This Bench in PRABHJYOT SINGH VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, LUDHIANA AND M/S STAR SPICES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, LUDHIANA [2024 (6) TMI 351 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH] in respect of appeal filed by M/s Star Spices, decided the case involving the same set of facts and from the same impugned orders. The said order of the Bench has not been stayed by any Competent Court and therefore, there are no reason to deviate from the decision taken in the above case. Absolute confiscation is set aside and the appellants are allowed to re-export the impugned goods on payment of a fine, in lieu of confiscation, of Rs.12 Lakhs. Penalty imposed on the appellants under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 is reduced to Rs.5 Lakhs - impugned goods are permitted to be re-exported subject to the compliance of the impugned order subject to the above modifications - petition allowed in part. Issues:Importation of areca nut claimed to be of Sri Lankan origin, but actually from Indonesia. Areca nut found to be unfit for human consumption. Confiscation of goods, imposition of penalties, and appeal against the decision.Analysis:The appellants imported three consignments of areca nut claiming Sri Lankan origin, but investigations revealed they were from Indonesia and unfit for consumption. Various laboratory reports confirmed the substandard quality of the areca nut. The goods were seized, and the appellants requested re-export without a show cause notice but were denied by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, who imposed hefty penalties and absolute confiscation.On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the decision. The appellants argued for re-export based on a similar case involving M/s Star Spices, where re-export was allowed with fines and penalties. The Department contended that the goods were prohibited and liable for penalty under the Customs Act, 1962.After considering both sides, the Tribunal referred to a previous case involving M/s Star Spices and decided to allow re-export of the goods with modifications. The appellants were permitted to re-export the goods on payment of a fine and reduced penalty. They were required to provide an undertaking not to route the goods back and endorse export documents accordingly.One appeal was partially allowed, modifying the order for re-export and penalties. Another appeal was deemed non-maintainable as no appeal was filed with the First Appellate Authority. The Revenue was directed to comply with the order within two weeks of the appellants meeting the specified conditions.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
