CHIRAG ENTERPRISE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a proprietary concern is registered as Small Scale Industrial Unit with Central Excise, Jamnagar. The petitioner is engaged in manufacture of Methyl Methaerylate Monomer from Acrylic Plastic Scrap. The petitioner has a valid import licence for import of Acrylic Plastic Scrap (crushed). According to the petitioner, it placed an order with one M/s Acrica International for supply of Acrylic Plastic Strips. It is further the case of the petitioner that the said exporter shipped consignment containing 19.22 M.Ts. of goods described as Acrylic Plastic Strips. Upon arrival of goods at the Port of Bombay and subsequently at ICD, Ahmedabad, the petitioner filed Bill of Entry No.666 dated 7th March 2000 with respondent No.3 seeking clearance of the consignment. The goods so imported were examined by the customs authorities and finding the goods to be Acrylic Plastic Waste / Scrap, the authorities drew the samples from the said goods and sent the samples to Central Institute of Plastics Engineering & Technology, Ahmedabad for testing. Since the goods, as described in the Bill of Entry and other documents, were found to be different, the petitioner was issued a letter dated 11th February 2000, asking the petitioner to opt for show cause notice and / or personal hearing. The petitioner requested for personal hearing, but did not dispute the report of the test carried out by the Central Institute, as described hereinbefore. After hearing the petitioner, respondent No.3 passed the order on 21-7-2000 bearing No.16 / Additional Commissioner / 2000. In the said order, respondent No.3 imposed redemption fine of Rs.2,42,000/- under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 and also imposed a personal penalty of Rs.2,00,000/- under Section 112(a) of the Act. The importer was given an option to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine.

(2.) The petitioner chose to exercise the other option available to it, namely, keeping the Bill of Entry alive and preferring an appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals). The said appellate authority, after hearing the representative of the petitioner, set aside the order in original, and held that, "In view of the above that the consignment is as per the description / definition in P.N.No.392(PN)92-97, dated 1st January, 1997 and appellants are in possession of a valid import licence and while extnding the benefit of doubt that it is a case of bonafide mistake, the order of the adjudicating authority is not sustainable and is, accordingly, set aside and the appeal and appeal is allowed.".

(3.) Thereupon, the petitioner approached the respondent No.3 calling upon the said respondent to re-assess the Bill of Entry and release the cargo as early as possible. On 5th November 2001, the petitioner once again wrote to the respondent No.3 to issue the challan in terms of the order in original. In response thereto, on 14th December 2001, respondent No.3 wrote to the petitioner to clear the goods after payment of duty along with interest as per Section 47(2) of the Act, and to submit specific import licence as per appellate order.