TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 596
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on and found 64.280 MTs of old and used clothes classifiable under CTH 6309 (BCD 10%) and held a view that the said goods have been misdeclared and are liable for confiscation under the provisions of section 111(d) & (m) of the Act and importer is liable for penalty under section 112(a) of the Act. The officers placed the goods and five trucks carrying the goods under seizure. 3. Mr. Rakesh Singh, Government approved valuer determined the fair value of goods as Rs. 50,90,000/- and based on which differential duty was determined as Rs.7,06,028/- 4. The appellants vide their reply accepted their negligence and took full responsibility to pay fine/penalty and differential duty and waived SCN and personal hearing in the matter. The appellant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant is not contesting, duty and redemption fine on goods. Contest is only to penalty of Rs. 4,00,000/- under section 112(a) and redemption fine of Rs. 175,000 on conveyance, 6.1. The appellant submits that the stand taken by the appellant right from the investigation stage that there was no wilful misdeclaration; remains uncontroverted. It has been the submission of the appellant that their head office is at Panipat and their Unit at KASEZ was being supervised by junior staff, that appellant imported goods in to KASEZ in the normal course and after segregating only mutilated goods are removed and cleared into DTA. However, due to lack of supervision, the staff at KASEZ, inadvertently, cleared certain quantity of unmutilated clothes in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tled law that quantum of penalty should be commensurate to the offence. 7. Further, Section 111 does not contemplate imposition of redemption fine on conveyance. Secondly, there is otherwise also no reason given justifying imposition of redemption fine on trucks which were used for conveyance. 8. Learned Commissioner (appeals) clearly erred in going beyond the scope of case as was made in OIO by holding that Trucks were used for concealment. There is no case made out in OIO that trucks were used for concealment; trucks were used for conveyance only. Without prejudice to the aforesaid submissions, considering the mitigating factors as submitted herein above; reduction in redemption fine to the minimum would be just and fair. 9. As ag....