Mega Exim P.Ltd Vs. Cc, Amritsar

Mega Exim P.Ltd vs Cc, Amritsar

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jun 01, 2012

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/942247

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/942247
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: The Honourable Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
Decided On: Jun 01, 2012
Case Number: Customs Appeal No.520 of 2011(SM)
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mega Exim P.Ltd

Advocate Present for the Appellants: Vikrant Kakria, Advocate. Present for Respondent: Ms. Renu Jagdev, AR.

Respondent

Cc, Amritsar

Excerpt

.....materials and accordingly paid the differential duties also. 5. on the above basis, proceedings were initiated for confiscation of the goods on the charges of mis-declaration and for imposition of penalty. accordingly matter was adjudicated for confiscation of rerollable scrap with an option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of rs.2.50 lakhs and penalty of rs.1.50 lakhs. the order of the lower authority was upheld by the commissioner(appeals). hence the present appeal. 6. it is seen that it is the appellant themselves who came forward by way of filing a letter within a period of two days of filing bill of entry indicating that as per information received by them from the supplier, the goods imported were project demolition scrap and as such could contain rerollable scrap. the declaration in the bill of entry was made by the appellant based upon the description of the goods in the invoices as also in the packing list and based upon the certificate issued by the supplier. it is seen that vide their letter dtd. 11.06.10 addressed to addl. commissioner, customs, ludhiana, the appellant made a request that the goods be cleared after mutilation in as much as they have to use the same as melting scrap only. the said request was not accepted by the authorities. 7. in view of the above scenario, when the declaration was in accordance with the papers issued by the foreign supplier, the appellant himself came forward indicating presence of rerollable scrap and the appellant's request for mutilation of the same, i find no justifiable reasons for confiscation of the imported consignment or for imposition of penalty upon the appellant. the same is accordingly set aside and appeal is allowed with consequential relief.

Full Judgment

Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa:

1. The challenge in the present appeal is to redemption fine of Rs.2.50 lakhs and penalty of Rs.1.50 lakhs imposed upon the appellant.

2. After hearing both the sides, I find that the appellant imported a consignment of heavy melting scrap and accordingly filed the bill of entry. The said bill of entry was assessed and duty of Rs.5,02,546/- was paid.

3. It is seen that the bill of entry was filed on 13.05.10. The appellant addressed a letter on 15.05.10 to the Revenue indicating that the imported consignment of heavy melting scrap may contain rerollable material to the extent of 80 MT as per information received by them from supplier. Accordingly they made a request to re-assessment and the differential duty works out to the tune of Rs.6,46,734/- was paid by them on 01.06.10.

4. The said consignment was examined and as per the report of the Chartered Engineer (CE), based upon eye estimation, the rerollable scrap was found to be around 172 MT. The appellant accepted that the said consignment contain rerollable materials and accordingly paid the differential duties also.

5. On the above basis, proceedings were initiated for confiscation of the goods on the charges of mis-declaration and for imposition of penalty. Accordingly matter was adjudicated for confiscation of rerollable scrap with an option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs.2.50 lakhs and penalty of Rs.1.50 lakhs. The order of the lower authority was upheld by the Commissioner(Appeals). Hence the present appeal.

6. It is seen that it is the appellant themselves who came forward by way of filing a letter within a period of two days of filing bill of entry indicating that as per information received by them from the supplier, the goods imported were project demolition scrap and as such could contain rerollable scrap. The declaration in the bill of entry was made by the appellant based upon the description of the goods in the invoices as also in the packing list and based upon the certificate issued by the supplier. It is seen that vide their letter dtd. 11.06.10 addressed to Addl. Commissioner, Customs, Ludhiana, the appellant made a request that the goods be cleared after mutilation in as much as they have to use the same as melting scrap only. The said request was not accepted by the authorities.

7. In view of the above scenario, when the declaration was in accordance with the papers issued by the foreign supplier, the appellant himself came forward indicating presence of rerollable scrap and the appellant's request for mutilation of the same, I find no justifiable reasons for confiscation of the imported consignment or for imposition of penalty upon the appellant. The same is accordingly set aside and appeal is allowed with consequential relief.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Mega Exim P.Ltd vs Cc, Amritsar Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge The Honourable Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)