2026 (3) TMI 935

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of differential duty but upheld the confiscation of the goods under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. However the Redemption Fine was sustained but reduced to Rs.4,00,000/- under Section 125(1) ibid. The penalties under Section 112(a)(ii) of Rs.5000/- and of Rs.2,00,000/- imposed under Section 114AA respectively of the Customs Act on M/s Kumar Impex were also sustained. 2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the instant appeal are as follows. The appellant imported 'PU coated fabric' (thickness 0.50 mm +/- 10%) vide Bill of Entry dated 14.10.2016 and requested for first check examination. According to the department, certain discrepancies were noticed during examination regarding the description and also in the thickness of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e and penalties imposed under various provisions of Customs Act, 1962. 5. The appellant thereafter challenged the said order before this Tribunal wherein this Tribunal vide order dated 13.06.2023 allowed the appeal by setting aside the order therein and remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration in view of the fact brought to the notice of the Tribunal that the Bill of Entry had subsequently been finalised by the proper officer as per the value declared by the appellant. After remand, the impugned order has been passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 6. I have heard the Learned Consultant appearing for the appellant and learned Authorised Representative for Revenue and have also perused the case r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cts the confiscation of the goods under Section 111(m) is sustainable. Section 111 (m) provides for confiscation of 'any goods which do not correspond in respect of value or in any other particular with the entry made under this Act.' The said provision has been settled by various judicial precedents to mean that the discrepancy or misdeclaration must be material in nature. This provision is intended primarily to prevent evasion of customs duty and to safeguard government revenue. It is not meant to penalise the importers for minor, inconsequential or technical discrepancies which do not result in causing any loss of revenue to the exchequer or violation of import policy. Discrepancies that do not affect duty, import policy, compliance or a....