Crompton Greaves Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

1. appellant filed a bill of entry for clearance of five vacuum pumps, mentioned in the invoice and airway bill relating to the consignment.examination of the consignment showed the presence of 12 such pumps.after issue of notice and considering the reply, the collector of customs, in the order impugned in the appeal has ordered confiscation of the seven pumps found in excess under clause (m) of section 111 of the act and an option to redeem as payment of fine of rs. 10 lakhs and imposed penalty of rs. 2 lakhs under section 112. hence this appeal.2. the appellant's representative who is present requests a decision on merits.3. it is the contention of the appellant that it had placed two orders, dated 20th january, 1993 one for supply of seven pumps and the other for five and specifically asked for seven pumps to be shipped by sea and five pumps by air. the supply of all pumps was made by air due to the mistake by the foreign supplier which acknowledged this in its letter dated 20-5-1993.4. the fact that the seven pumps were not declared in the bill of entry renders them liable for confiscation. such confiscation cannot be escaped merely on the ground of bona fides of the importer.5. however, that consideration would be relevant in the matter quantum of fine and of penalty. in view of the presence of the documents such as two orders of the same date, specifically to ship particular part of the consignment by sea and acknowledged by the supplier. we are of the view that penalty imposed should be set aside on these facts and also the fact that the appellant is a reputed importer, which the commissioner mentions a reduction in the redemption fine is called for.6. we therefore, set aside the penalty and reduce the redemption fine to rs. 10 lakhs. appeal partly allowed. consequential relief.