TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (2) TMI 631
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd new, 2 Rubber Fenders were found to have not been declared. Further, the officers also found 8 boxes containing IMMARSAT/GMDSS 1 set and this was found unassembled and uninstalled. After investigation and issue of show cause notice, proceedings culminated into the impugned order whereby the learned Commissioner confiscated the goods which were found not declared. In respect of GMDSS set, duty was demanded and further absolute confiscation of the same was also ordered and direction was given to destroy the same under Panchnama. The appeals were filed by various appellants and the Tribunal vide Order No.1352-1355/WZB/ AHD/2007, dt.15.6.07 set aside the penalty on the captain of the vessel and all other appellants. It was also observed that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p. However, the same was, according to Commissioner, not installed and was lying in unassembled condition, when the ship came back on 30th August. In the drop back of above admitted position, charges of importation of the station, without production of import licence, cannot be upheld. As such, the only charge remains about non-declaration of the same by the Captain. It has been pointed out by the Ld.Advocate that the vessel arrived at Kandla on 30.8.99 and was put to search from 31.8.99. As per the provisions of law, the period of 24 hrs was available to the Captain for making declaration, which period was not expired by the time of the visit of officers. As such, no serious charge can be framed against the Captain for not making the decla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t justified in recording in its order dt.15.6.07 that no arguments had been advanced before it as regards confiscation of other goods. The Tribunal was also not justified in not accepting the rectification application made by the appellant pointing out the defect in the earlier order. In the circumstances, the impugned order of the Tribunal suffers from the infirmities pointed out hereinabove, and as such cannot be sustained. The question formulated stands answered accordingly. 18. The impugned order dt.15.6.07 made by the Tribunal in Appeal No.1036 of 2001 is hereby quashed and set aside only to the extent it records that no arguments were advanced before the Tribunal as regards confiscation and destruction of GMDSS station or fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was taken up. There is no finding anywhere in the records whether these goods were found in the records of the vessel or not and even if they were to be found, where they were to be exactly recorded. In the absence of clear finding in this regard, no conclusion can be drawn as to whether these were unaccounted goods in the ship. This is further complicated by the position with regard to GMDSS which was admittedly purchased by the owner in India and was declared in the shipping bill at the time when the ship set sail from India. If it was declared in the shipping bill, the question arises why no action taken by the Customs officers during the relevant time. Learned Commissioner has also observed that as per the instructions of Ministry of C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that Commissioner has not considered the fact that the appellant was exempted from the condition of relevant rules and was entitled to keep wireless set without licence, the matter is required to be remanded to the Commissioner. Further, whether IGM has been filed or not and if it was not filed, what was the basis to arrive at the conclusion that these goods have not been accounted for, is also required to be considered. In any case, in view of the fact that there is no specific observation about non-maintenance of records in respect of confiscated goods other than GMDSS set and also taking into account the fact that value of the goods is very low and also taking into consideration the fact that penalty has already been set aside, which is....