TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 444
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t 28.10.2022 is finalized accordingly as aforesaid. (ii) I order for the absolute confiscation of the goods declared as "Betel Nut" but found to be Arecanuts (Total weight 1020 Kgs packed in 17 Bags) valued at of Rs. 6,27,543/- (Rupees Six Lakh Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Forty Three only) mentioned at SI.No.-04 of the Bill of Entry No. 3058502 dt 28.10.2022 under Section 111(m) and 111(q) of the Customs Act, 1962. (iii) Limpose a penalty of Rs. 6,27,543/- (Rupees Six Lakh Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Forty Three only) upon M/s Shivom Trading Company, Shop No.-04,215/48. Shubhash Marg, Lucknow-226003 under Section 112 (i) of the Customs Act, 1962.24. This order is issued without prejudice to any other action that may be taken against the importer or any other person under the provision of the Customs Act, 1962, or any other law for the time-being in force in India,. (iv) I order for the enforcement of Bond No. 2002066945 dated 24.11.2022 executed by M/s Shivom Trading Company and appropriation of FDR No-13691160 dated 22.11.2022 executed at the time of Provisional assessment of the goods declared as "Betel Nut" mentioned at Sl.No-04 o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....absolutely under Section 111(m) and Section 111(q) of the Customs Act, 1962. (iii) Penalty should not be imposed upon M/s Shivom Trading Company, Shop No. 4, 215/48, Shubhash Marg, Lucknow-226003 under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 for contravention of the provisions of Customs Law as discussed above." 2.8 The show cause notice was adjudicated vide Order-in-Original dated 27.09.2023 referred in para 1 above. 2.9 Aggrieved appellant have filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order rejected the appeal of the appellant. 2.10 Aggrieved appellant have filed this appeal. 3.1 I have heard Shri Anuj Shukla, Advocate for the Appellant and Smt Chitra Srivastava, Authorized Represenative for the revenue. 3.2 Arguing for the appellant learned counsel submits that they are in this appeal not challenging the absolute confiscation of the Areca Nuts declared by them in their bill of entry valued at Rs 6,27,543/- as the goods have become unfit for human consumption and have nil value. They are in this appeal challenging the penalty equivalent to the value of the goods imposed on them. 3.3 Authorized representative reiterates the findings....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bited under Notification No. 20/2015-2020 dated 25/07/2020. The Appellant's goods were declared with a CIF value of Rs. 101.81/KG, which is less than the prescribed limit. Therefore, the import of the goods was in contravention of the import policy and liable for confiscation and penalty. 5.8 In conclusion, I find that the Appellant has failed to establish any grounds for interference with the Order-in-Original. The Appellant's attempt to mis classify, mis-declare, and import prohibited goods cannot be condoned. The penalty imposed is proportionate to the gravity of the offense, and the confiscation of the goods is justified." 4.3 I find that the issue involved in the present case leading to the confiscation of these goods is only claim of wrong classification on the Bill of Entry made by the appellant. I also note that Commissioner has recorded that case was not limited to misclassification but also resulted in undervaluation for the reason in case of the correct classification under CTH 21069020 the value for determination of ad-valorem duty and appellant had penalized with equal amount of penalty under Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962. 4.4 I note t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ree to clear the consignment under proposed classification. Kindly appreciate that the consignment had arrived some time in December, 2004 and is lying at the port incurring demurrage and other costs." It is evident from a bare reading that the appellant had made no such admission and it was only interested in getting the goods released as soon as possible to avoid recurring financial burden on account of demurrage, incidental charges etc. 7. In these circumstances, we are unable to uphold the finding on the point of confiscation we accordingly hold that the appellant was not liable to pay redemption fine in lieu of confiscation nor liable to pay any penalty." 4.5 In case of Aurbindo Pharma [2009 (245) E.L.T. 194 (Tri. - Chennai)] following was observed: "4. After considering the submissions, we have found a valid point in the submissions of the appellants and their consultant. The assessment was provisional pending correct classification of the goods by the Department. The goods were correctly classified by the Department and that classification was readily accepted by the assessee. Hence this cannot be a case of misdeclaration, classification and, fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....134 (Tri. - Hyd.)] held as follows: "5. We ..... The only point of allegation that can sustain in the present case is that the assessee has wrongly classified the imported goods in their bills of entry. The importer assessee is not an expert in classification of products and it is always possible that they claimed wrong classification. It is open for the department to direct the importer to correct classification or issue a show cause notice proposing revision of classification. Merely claiming the wrong classification by itself does not amount to misdeclaration of the goods and there is nothing on record to show that the description of the goods in the Bill of Entry and other documents as well as in the test report do not match. The department's case has to fail on this ground alone for the extended period of limitation and correspondingly the penalties also need to be set aside. 6. ...... 7. As we have found that there was no misdeclaration at all and the appellant is entitled for the exemption notification in any case and there is nothing to be gained by the appellant by classifying their product under one heading or the other, we find the confiscation....