2014 (3) TMI 641

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orted a medical equipment and declared it as "Da Vinci Surgical System (Endoscope Systern)" claiming classification of goods under' Customs, Tariff Item 90189011 and claiming benefit of concessional rate of duty under S. No. 363(A) in Notification 21/2002-Cus dated 01-03-2002. The exemption covered fibre optic endoscopes of different kinds. The Care Foundation relied upon a commercial invoice from the supplier which showed the description as "IS 1200 Da Vinci Surgical System" from the literature published by J. Mitra & Bros, the sole indenting agent of the supplier. The bill of entry was assessed for customs duty of Rs.29.03 lakhs which was paid. The customs department initiated proceedings based upon information that the goods did not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the rationale was deletion of the penalty under section 114A is as follows : "18. One of the legal issue (sic) raised is that in this case the assessment was provisional and full duty was paid before clearance of goods. So there was no demand under section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 for duty short levied. When there is no such demand no penalty can be imposed under section 114A of the Customs Act. The opening part of the said section reads as under : Section 114A. Penalty for short-levy or non-levy of duty in certain cases. - Where the duty has not been levied or has been short-levied or the interest has not been charged or paid or has been part paid or the duty or interest has been erroneously refunded by reason of collusion or any ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s thus upheld. However considering the nature of the equipment to be one used in medical care and also the nature of mis-declaration involved and the letter issued by a public authority like the Chief Medical Officer DGHS, we reduce the redemption fine to Rs. 25 lakhs. 21. Once the goods are liable to confiscation any person who, in relation to any goods, does or omits to do any act which act or omission would render such goods liable to confiscation under section 111 is liable to penalty under section 112 of the Customs Act. The part played by Shri. Arun K. Tiwari is obvious and there is no case for fully absolving them from the penalty imposed on him. However considering that the persons concerned were not doing it for any personal gai....