LAWS(CE)-2001-5-368

HARI JOT INDUSTRIES Vs. CC, NEW DELHI

Decided On May 25, 2001
Hari Jot Industries Appellant
V/S
Cc, New Delhi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE brief facts of the case are as under : -

(2.) THE appellants are manufactured and exporters of bicycle parts. They filed shipping Bill dated 12.10.2000 for export of bicycle parts namely, Handle Stem and Seat under a claim of drawback. The FOB value of Seat Stay (1,26,000 pieces) was declared in the Shipping Bill as Rs.10,01,170.80 and a total drawback of duty of Rs.3,84,300 was claimed thereon. On examination of the goods, it was discovered that the goods declared as 'Seat Stay' under DBK Serial No. 87.111 were really 'Seat Fittings' falling under DBK Serial No. 87.116, for which drawback was admissible only @ 5% of FOB value, amounting to Rs. 50,058.54. The Customs authorities alleged that the appellants had mis -declared Seat Fittings as 'Seat Stay' for claiming drawback at higher rate than what was admissible. They, further, held the goods to be "prohibited goods" under Section 2(33) of the Customs Act and to be liable to confiscation under Clauses (h) and (i) of Section 113 of the Act. They also maintained that the appellants had rendered themselves liable to penalty under Section 114 of the Act. Upon being informed of this position, the appellants waived show -cause notice and pleaded for sympathetic consideration of their case, in their letter dated 6.11.2000 submitted to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. In that letter, the appellants admitted that, due to a mistake on the part of their packing labourers, the Seat fittings (which were meant for some other foreign buyers) happened to be packed, instead of Seat Stay, for purpose of export under the above Shipping Bill. The appellants, in that letter, also requested the Dy. Commissioner to allow them to amend the Shipping Bill or, in the alternative, to permit them to withdraw the entire lot. Subsequently, as requested by the party, the jurisdictional commissioner of Customs gave a personal hearing to the appellants and thereafter passed order dated 23.11.2000 confiscating the goods under Section 113 (h) and (i) of the Customs Act, with option to the party to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs.15 lakhs, and imposing on them a penalty of Rs.50,000/ - under Section 114 of the Act. Hence the present appeal.

(3.) EXAMINED the records and heard both sides.