TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 557
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hem. 2. The appellant while filing Bill(s) of Entry as mentioned above failed to submit/produce original/ bank signed documents like Commercial Invoice, Bill of Lading, Certificate of Weight, Certificate of Quality, High Sea Sale agreement and other particulars like 'demurrage charges' paid. Hence, the Bills of Entry were 'provisionally assessed' under Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 pending submission of the desired documents. 3. The appellant had executed Provisional Duty Bonds (PD Bonds) in terms of Regulation 3 of the Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 2011, which were accepted by the then Assistant/ Deputy Commissioner of Customs, while allowing for 'provisional assessment'. The appellant, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ertaking that he shall produce such document or information within one month or within such extended period as the proper officer may allow, and the person executing the bond shall pay the deficiency, if any, between the duty finally assessed or re- assessed, as the case may be, and the duty provisionally assessed." 5.1 It is observed in the above Order-in-Original that the appellant had executed Provisional Duty (PD Bonds) Bonds in terms of Regulation 3 of the Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 2011, which were accepted by the then Assistant/ Deputy Commissioner of Customs, while allowing for 'provisional assessment"; the appellant in the said PD Bonds had undertaken to submit all the desired documents within one mon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Revenue vide the impugned order. The observation of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order reads as under: - "5.5: Out of 19 nos. of Bill of Entry, 11 nos. of Bill of Entry have been finalized and 8 nos. of Bill of Entry are yet to be finalized. The purpose of imposition of penalty should be to get the provisional assessment finalized for delay in submission of documents. However, even now, 8 cases have not been finalized. Imposition of mere Rs.10, 000/- penalty for 8 cases is meagre. It is the contention of the appellant Department that maximum penalty @ Rs. 50,000 X 8 = Rs.4,00,000/- should have been imposed. I am in agreement with the view of the Department in view of Para 5.3 and 5.4 above. 7. Aggrieved by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vision of these regulations or abets such contraventions, or who fails to comply with any provision of these regulations with which it was his duty to comply, he shall be liable to penalty which may extent to Rs.50,000/- " (ii) Upon a conjoint reading of the Regulations 3(3) and 5 of the above Regulation, it is evident that penalty is liable to be attracted for non-submission of documents / information to the proper officer within one month of the date of execution of the bond, and such penalty "may extend to Rs.50,000/-". Therefore, the quantum of penalty is a matter of discretion of the proper officer and obviously it is not mandatory to impose the maximum penalty of the Rs.50,000/- in each case of default by the importer/exporte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tment has not been able to establish any deliberate delay or any mala fide intention on the part of the appellant. As and when the appellant could gather the requisite documents they were presented before the assessing officers for finalising the provisional assessments. In fact, out of the 35 Bills of Entry involved, 27 could be finalised even before passing of the adjudication order. Keeping all this in view, the adjudicating authority took a fair decision and imposed a nominal penalty of Rs. 20,000/- which comes to Rs. 2,500/- for each of the remaining 8 Bills of Entry yet to be finalised for want of all the documents. This amount has already been paid by the appellant. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) does not establish any groun....