RAJGUHAN EXPORTS & IMPORTS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE assessee has preferred this appeal as against the Order, dated 4 -12 -2003 passed in Final Order No. 1055/2003 [2004 (154) E.L.T. 441 (Tri. -Chennai)] by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Southern Regional Bench, Chennai 600 006, raising the following question of law:

(2.) IT is seen from the letter written by the supplier on 9 -3 -1999 that due to the mistake committed by the filling point staff allocating the wrong product pipe, instead of filing RBD Palmolein Oil, the drums were filled with RBD Coconut Oil. Based on the admission, proceedings were initiated to impose penalty on the assessee on the ground of deliberate misdeclaration. The Authorities found that but for the deduction of the officers, the assessee would have benefited by about Rs. 16 lakhs out of the order on the basis of the market price of Palmolein Oil and Coconut Oil and the assessee would have violated the conditions of ITC (HS) Provisions. In the circumstances, the Authorities held that the goods are liable for confiscation. Apart from this, under the provisions of Section 111(d) and misdeclaration under Section 111(m) read with Section 3(3) of the Foreign Trade and Development Act, 1992, the Authorities allowed the importers to redeem the goods on payment of a fine of Rs. 4,00,000/ - for the purpose of exports and a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/ - was also imposed. Against this, the assessee went on appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, which confirmed the order but, however, reduced the penalty from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh.

(3.) AS far as the present appeal is concerned, as already pointed out in the preceding paragraphs, the reply given by the suppliers on 11 -3 -1999, as regards the mistake committed by the filling point staff is only an afterthought as the same having been given long after the test conducted by the Port Authorities. If the supplier had found the same even before the point of dispatch, nothing prevented them from informing the Importer about the mistakes committed. Accordingly, we do not find any justification to interfere with the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.