1999 (10) TMI 331 - AT - Customs

Importers Held Liable for Duty Despite Re-Export Claim

The tribunal held that the appellants were liable for duty, penalty, and fine despite claiming re-exportation. The ownership of goods transferred to the ... Demand - Redemption fine and penalty Issues:1. Import of goods without proper endorsement.2. Claim of re-exportation.3. Applicability of case laws for non-levy of penalty and redemption fine.4. Ownership of goods after clearance from Customs.5. Liability for duty, penalty, and fine post-clearance.Import of goods without proper endorsement:The case involved M/s. Croslands Research Laboratories Ltd., a division of Ranbaxy Laboratories, receiving shipping documents for goods called 'artesunate' from Vietnam. The goods were valued at Rs. 22 lakhs and were exported in the name of an Australian company. The appellants claimed they did not import the goods and that the supplier agreed to take them back. However, the bill of entry was filed for home consumption without proper endorsement, raising questions about the importation process.Claim of re-exportation:The appellants argued that they were attempting to re-export the goods and cited case laws for non-levy of penalty and redemption fine in such cases. They contended that they had not imported the goods and relied on previous judgments for support. However, the tribunal found that the bill of entry filed for home consumption contradicted the claim of re-exportation, as re-exportation can only occur after Customs clearance.Applicability of case laws for non-levy of penalty and redemption fine:The tribunal examined the case laws cited by the appellant's representative but concluded that they were not applicable to the current situation. The tribunal distinguished the cited judgments based on the specific facts and circumstances of the case before them, highlighting the importance of factual differences in legal precedents.Ownership of goods after clearance from Customs:After analyzing the ownership of goods post-clearance, the tribunal emphasized that once the goods are cleared by Customs and the bill of entry is filed, the importer becomes the owner of the goods. The tribunal noted that the property in the goods is transferred to the importer upon clearance, regardless of payment status or potential re-exportation intentions.Liability for duty, penalty, and fine post-clearance:The tribunal rejected the appellant's argument that they should be exempt from duty, penalty, and fine due to their claim of re-exportation. The tribunal emphasized that after clearance, the Customs authority cannot collect penalties or fines if re-exportation does not occur. As the appellants had filed a bill of entry and represented themselves as importers, the tribunal found them liable for duty, penalty, and fine. Consequently, all three appeals were dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the stay petitions as well.