2014 (11) TMI 490

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside the levy of penalty imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962?" 2. The respondent/importer filed a bill of entry dated 3-1-2002 for clearance of Tungsten Carbide Tips Cutting Tools model/type YG15 K034 and declared the unit price at USD 6.63 per kg. Based on the recorded contemporaneous prices, the Department proposed to enhance the value to USD 11.06 per kg. The respondent/importer accepted the enhanced value. During the course of inspection, it was found that there was a difference between the gross weight and the net weight. The gross weight, was 1242.14 kg, whereas the net weight was only 600 kg. Thus, there was an excess quantity of 475.64....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n on the part, of the importer to mis-declare the quantity. As regards the value, the assessee contended that there was no evidence available with the Department to suspect the price declared by the importer and there was no justification to resort to contemporaneous import price. The importer also resisted the order imposing penalty. The Tribunal, after considering the case of the respondent/importer, upheld the finding as regards the confiscation of the goads under Section 111(1). As regards the charge of mis-declaration of the value of the goods, the Tribunal pointed out that the enhancement is only on the basis of higher contemporaneous import price and accordingly set aside the penalty and also for the same reasons reduced the redempti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ucing any materials. Therefore, the Tribunal rightly confirmed the order of confiscation, which has not been challenged by the importer. 6. In order to invoke Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, it is essential that a 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, or abets the doing or omission of such an act, or in terms of clause (b) of Section 112 acquires possession of or is in any way concerned in carrying, removing, depositing, keeping, etc., any goods which he knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation under Section 111. 7. The case on hand would fall within the ambit of clause (a) of Section 112. ....