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 reduces penalty for non-compliant woollen rags import</h1> The Tribunal reduced the personal penalty imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act from Rs. 11,000 to Rs. 5,000 for importing woollen rags not ... Penalty - Jurisdiction - Demurrage Issues:- Imposition of personal penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962- Requirement of proper mutilation for clearance of imported goods- Discrepancy in the length and width of imported goods- Applicability of penalty and quantum of penalty- Request for issuance of detention certificateAnalysis:The appeal was filed against an order imposing a personal penalty of Rs. 11,000 on the appellant for importing woollen rags that were not completely pre-mutilated as required by Customs regulations. The goods were found to be of varying lengths and widths, not meeting the standards set by Public Notices. The appellants, regular importers, argued that there was no misdeclaration and that the delay in resolving the issue caused them financial losses. The adjudicating authority ordered the release of goods after further mutilation but upheld the penalty.The Tribunal considered whether the penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act was justified and if the quantum of penalty was disproportionate. It was noted that the imported goods did not meet the standard of pre-mutilation required by Indian Customs, specifically in terms of length and width. The Tribunal reduced the penalty from Rs. 11,000 to Rs. 5,000, considering the circumstances of the case.Regarding the request for issuance of a detention certificate, the Tribunal clarified that it did not have jurisdiction to direct the issuance of such a certificate. The Customs Act empowers the Tribunal to hear appeals against decisions of the adjudicating authority, not to intervene in executive functions like the issuance of detention certificates. The Tribunal emphasized that its jurisdiction was limited to adjudication matters and did not extend to executive functions.In conclusion, the Tribunal confirmed the order with the modification of reducing the personal penalty to Rs. 5,000. The request for a detention certificate was dismissed, with the Tribunal stating that the remedy for such a request lies elsewhere. The appeal was disposed of, with any consequential relief to be provided accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
