TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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 orders clearance of imported goods, reduces penalty to ensure uniformity.</h1> <h3>PIONEER INTERNATIONAL Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI</h3> PIONEER INTERNATIONAL Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI - 1999 (107) E.L.T. 476 (Tribunal) Issues:1. Valuation of imported goods.2. Confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty.3. Determination of fine and penalty reduction.Valuation of Imported Goods:The appellant imported engines, some of which were found with Air Conditioner compressors. The Commissioner rejected the declared value, citing inaccurate description of goods and compared them with contemporaneous imports, leading to an enhanced value. The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner's absolute confiscation of goods was unjust as similar imports had been cleared previously with fines. The Tribunal held that the discretion under Section 125 must be used consistently and ordered clearance on payment of a suitable fine. The Commissioner's rejection of transaction value lacked valid grounds, and the Tribunal upheld the value declared by the importers.Confiscation of Goods and Imposition of Penalty:The Commissioner ordered absolute confiscation and imposed a penalty on the importers due to the nature of the goods and perceived contravention of the law. The Tribunal acknowledged the need for deterrent penalties but emphasized the importance of uniform application. Considering the penalty imposed in a similar case involving the same importers, the Tribunal reduced the penalty from Rs. 5 lakhs to Rs. 2.5 lakhs, aiming for consistency in penalty application across importers.Determination of Fine and Penalty Reduction:The Tribunal discussed the quantification of the fine, considering previous orders and the consistency in applying redemption percentages. It noted the importance of factors under Section 125 and reduced the penalty to align with penalties imposed in similar cases involving the same importers. The Tribunal also factored in demurrage costs while determining the fine, maintaining fairness and consistency in the penalty reduction process.---
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
