{"id":324184,"date":"2024-06-12T15:30:28","date_gmt":"2024-06-12T10:00:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=324184"},"modified":"2024-06-28T09:39:44","modified_gmt":"2024-06-28T04:09:44","slug":"cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Releasing prohibited goods without fine is not a valid option\u2019; CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai:<\/span> In an appeal filed by the Scania Commercial Vehicles India Pvt. Ltd.-Appellant against the order dated 02-03-2023 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals — II), Chennai (‘the Appellate Authority’), Ajit Kumar, Member (Technical)<\/span> stated that once the goods were imported in contravention to the Customs Act, 1962<\/a> (‘the Customs Act’), they were liable for confiscation. In case, the goods were ‘prohibited goods’, it was within the discretion of the Proper Officer to confiscate the goods or to allow it to be redeemed on payment of a fine. Releasing prohibited goods without imposing a fine was not a valid option. In the present case, after the appellant informed that they were unable to fulfil the conditions of Environmental Protection Rules, 1986 (‘EPR, 1986’), it was incumbent to confiscate the imported prohibited goods. Once the goods were confiscated, the title of the goods was held by government and to get back the possession of the goods, redemption fine was needed to be paid.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal opined that a penalty was the result of a breach of statutory duty. While a fine was imposed on the redemption of offending goods imported in breach of law, a penalty was levied on a person responsible for the breach of statutory duty. Thus, the Tribunal did not find any ground for interference in the present case and dismissed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

Appellant had an automobile manufacturing facility at Narasapura, Karnataka and was specialized in manufacture of truck, bus, automobile engines etc. The appellant filed Bills of Entry (‘BE’) for import of eight diesel engines and one industrial engines for home consumption and deposited customs duty of Rs. 36,59,136. The imported engines were found not to be supported by Type Approval Certificate and the Certificate of Conformity of Production as prescribed under the EPR, 1986.<\/p>\n

Since, the appellant could not furnish the certificates from the supplier, they amended the BE from home consumption to warehousing as per Section 49<\/a> of the Customs Act<\/a> and requested for re-export of the diesel engines. Further, due to their inability to produce the requisite certificates and comply with the mandatory provisions of import, the appellant requested the matter to be adjudicated. After due process of law, the adjudicating authority confiscated eight diesel engines and one industrial engine imported on 4-12-2021 and allowed redemption of the said goods on payment of Rs.8 lakhs for re-export as requested within a period of sixty days. The adjudicating authority also imposed penalty of Rs. 3 lakhs on the appellant.<\/p>\n

The appellants paid the redemption fine and penalty under protest as they were incurring heavy demurrage charges. The appellants filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority who vide the impugned order rejected the appeal and allowed thirty days’ time for re-exporting the goods. Hence, the appeal was filed before this Tribunal.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/p>\n

Issue 1: When the goods were re-exported, the question of confiscation of goods under Section 111(d)<\/a> of the Customs Act, 1962<\/a> did not arise.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal stated that the goods become liable to confiscation if the importer or the exporter contravenes any provisions of the CA Act or any other Act for the time being in force. In the present case, the goods were imported in contravention of the EPR, 1986, hence, they were prohibited goods. The Court referred to Union of India<\/span> v. Raj Grow Impex LLP<\/span>, ­­­­­­(2021) 18 SC 601<\/a> and stated that due to a distinction made between ‘prohibited goods’ and ‘other goods’ under Section 125(1) of the Customs Act, there was no compulsion to allow redemption of prohibited goods.<\/p>\n

Confiscation of offending goods under section 111(d) was an action precedent to allow the same to be redeemed under section 125<\/a> of the Customs Act<\/a>. The permission for export of prohibited goods that were confiscated and redeemed, was an administrative order and it came into operation only after the importer gets back title to the confiscated goods on paying the redemption fine. The Tribunal stated that the permission for re-export was bundled and passed in a quasi-judicial order relating to the confiscation and redemption of goods was only for administrative convenience. Further, it provided certainty to the action the importer was permitted to take post redemption of the goods. It also made it easier for the importer, who did not have to file a fresh application for export post redemption of the goods and await an uncertain outcome.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Tribunal stated that it was clear that an order permitting re-export of goods was sequentially a separate process which would come into play only after the importer redeems the confiscated goods. Simply because the decision was bundled along with a quasi-judicial order, it would not change the sequence of events. Therefore, confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act was must before the administrative permission for the export of the said goods was given at the administrative discretion of the Proper officer.<\/p>\n

Issue 2: No redemption fine was imposable on the goods that were re-exported.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal stated that once the goods were imported in contravention to the Customs Act, they were liable for confiscation. In case the goods were ‘prohibited goods’, it was within the discretion of the Proper Officer to confiscate the goods or to allow it to be redeemed on payment of a fine. Releasing prohibited goods without imposing a fine was not a valid option. In the present case, after the appellant informed the Proper Officer that they were unable to fulfil the conditions of EPR 1986, it was incumbent on the Officer to confiscate the imported prohibited goods. Once the goods were confiscated, the title of the goods was held by government and to get back the possession of the goods, redemption fine as decided by the Proper Officer was needed to be paid.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal stated that to allow the redemption of prohibited goods was part of the Proper Officer’s discretionary jurisdiction. No court had laid down the law that prohibited goods, imported without authorization, were to be released for re-export without payment of redemption fine. Such a stance would encourage importers smuggling \/ making improper import of goods, to take a chance with the law and if caught request for re-export of the offending goods without a fine.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal stated that if the offending goods were cleared for home consumption, fine was to be imposed and if the importer requested for its export, no fine could be imposed. The position was legally untenable and discriminatory. The offence did not get cured by the intended destination of the goods. Confiscated goods could be redeemed either for home consumption \/ warehousing or for export only on payment of a fine. Thus, the Tribunal stated that the impugned order was legal and proper and no interference in the discretion exercised by the Proper Officer was called for.<\/p>\n

Issue 3: No penalty under Section 112(a) cannot be imposed when goods are re-exported.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal opined that a penalty was the result of a breach of statutory duty. The main object behind the imposition of penalty was deterrence. Re-export of the goods did not cure the breach of statutory duty already committed. While a fine was imposed on the redemption of offending goods imported in breach of law, a penalty was levied on a person responsible for the breach of statutory duty. No interference should be made by an appellate body, in the discretionary order passed by a lower authority, just because another view might be possible, except on grounds of mala fides or extreme arbitrariness. Thus, the Tribunal did not find any ground for interference in the present case and dismissed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

[Scania Commercial Vehicles India (P) Ltd. v. Commr. of Customs, 2024 SCC OnLine CESTAT 587<\/a>, Order dated 07-06-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Appellant:<\/span> S. Ganesh Aravindh, Advocate;<\/p>\n

For the Respondent<\/span>– M. Selvakumar, AC (AR).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Tribunal stated that no court has held that prohibited goods were to be released for re-export without payment of redemption fine. Such a stance would encourage importers smuggling\/making improper import of goods, to take a chance with the law and if caught, request for re-export without a fine.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67520,"featured_media":319582,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[6651,69508,30024,12581,2627,46268,69733,37747],"class_list":["post-324184","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-cestat","tag-customs-acts","tag-customs-duty","tag-imported-goods","tag-Penalty","tag-prohibited-goods","tag-re-export-of-goods","tag-redemption-fine"],"yoast_head":"\nCESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"CESTAT upheld the order directing to pay the appellant, the redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Releasing prohibited goods without fine is not a valid option\u2019; CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"CESTAT upheld the order directing to pay the appellant, the redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-06-12T10:00:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-06-28T04:09:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/CESTAT.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arushi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018Releasing prohibited goods without fine is not a valid option\u2019; CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arushi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/\",\"name\":\"CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/CESTAT.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-06-12T10:00:28+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-06-28T04:09:44+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76\"},\"description\":\"CESTAT upheld the order directing to pay the appellant, the redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/CESTAT.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/CESTAT.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"CESTAT\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Releasing prohibited goods without fine is not a valid option\u2019; CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76\",\"name\":\"Arushi\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arushi\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/arushi\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods | SCC Times","description":"CESTAT upheld the order directing to pay the appellant, the redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Releasing prohibited goods without fine is not a valid option\u2019; CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods","og_description":"CESTAT upheld the order directing to pay the appellant, the redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-06-12T10:00:28+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-06-28T04:09:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/CESTAT.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arushi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018Releasing prohibited goods without fine is not a valid option\u2019; CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arushi","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/","name":"CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/CESTAT.webp","datePublished":"2024-06-12T10:00:28+00:00","dateModified":"2024-06-28T04:09:44+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76"},"description":"CESTAT upheld the order directing to pay the appellant, the redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/CESTAT.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/CESTAT.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"CESTAT"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/12\/cestat-upholds-order-directing-to-pay-redemption-fine-and-penalty-on-re-export-of-prohibited-goods-scctimes\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Releasing prohibited goods without fine is not a valid option\u2019; CESTAT upholds order directing to pay redemption fine and penalty on re-export of prohibited goods"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76","name":"Arushi","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arushi"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/arushi\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/CESTAT.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":220148,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/27\/cestat-redemption-fine-imposed-on-appellant-for-violating-fssai-regulations-not-maintainable-order-to-re-export-goods-sustained\/","url_meta":{"origin":324184,"position":0},"title":"CESTAT | Redemption fine imposed on appellant for violating FSSAI regulations not maintainable; order to re-export goods sustained","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 27, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellant Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai: Sulekha Beevi C.S. (Judicial Member) modified the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in favor of the appellant. The appellant had filed a bill of entry for the importation of Arecanuts and had declared its value as Rs 1,06,14,272. On verification, the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":241924,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/01\/07\/cestat-whether-confiscation-of-goods-and-imposition-of-fine-and-penalty-by-the-lower-authority-in-absence-of-valid-psi-certificate-maintainable-tribunal-explains\/","url_meta":{"origin":324184,"position":1},"title":"CESTAT | Whether confiscation of goods and imposition of fine and penalty by the Lower Authority in absence of valid PSI certificate maintainable; Tribunal explains","author":"Editor","date":"January 7, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): P.K. Choudhary (Judicial Member) partly allowed an appeal which was filed against the Order-in-Appeal whereby two separate appeals of the appellant against two Orders-in-Original had been dismissed. The basic issue recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) was whether confiscation of goods and imposition\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":235860,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/09\/16\/cestat-%e2%94%82-employee-not-liable-for-the-actions-of-the-senior-while-following-instructions-tribunal-allows-appeal-and-sets-aside-penalty-under-s-112-a-of-customs-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":324184,"position":2},"title":"CESTAT | Employee not liable for the actions of the senior while following instructions; Tribunal allows appeal and sets aside penalty under S. 112 (a) of Customs Act","author":"Editor","date":"September 16, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): A Division Bench of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) and C.L. Mahar (Technical Member), allowed an appeal filed by the appellant who was an employee, \"H\u201f Cardholder working with Customs House Agent -- Commercial Clearing Agencies Pvt. Limited, at the relevant time. In\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":250017,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/19\/cant-let-improper-imports-affect-indian-farmers-and-national-economy-prohibited-goods-liable-to-absolute-confiscation-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":324184,"position":3},"title":"Can’t let improper imports affect Indian farmers and national economy. “Prohibited goods” liable to absolute confiscation: Supreme Court","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"June 19, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWhen personal business interests of importers clash with public interest, the former has to, obviously, give way to the latter.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":357175,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/20\/drawback-payable-on-market-value-of-goods-cestat\/","url_meta":{"origin":324184,"position":4},"title":"Drawback due on goods will be payable when the amount is less than market value of goods: CESTAT","author":"Bharti","date":"August 20, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\"If the transaction value (FOB value) is so high, that the drawback due on the goods exceeds the market value of the goods, then, as per section 76(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, no drawback shall be allowed.\"","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Drawback payable on market value of goods","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Drawback-payable-on-market-value-of-goods.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Drawback-payable-on-market-value-of-goods.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Drawback-payable-on-market-value-of-goods.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Drawback-payable-on-market-value-of-goods.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Drawback-payable-on-market-value-of-goods.webp?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Drawback-payable-on-market-value-of-goods.webp?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":258911,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/23\/cestat-suppression-of-facts-in-the-nature-of-undeclared-goods-and-misdeclared-good-resulting-in-confiscation-made-under-s-28-4-held-to-be-valid-and-proper\/","url_meta":{"origin":324184,"position":5},"title":"CESTAT | Suppression of facts in the nature of \u2018undeclared goods\u2019 and \u2018misdeclared good\u2019 resulting in confiscation made under S. 28 (4), held to be valid and proper","author":"Editor","date":"December 23, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Sulekha Beevi (Judicial Member), dismissed the appeal against the order of Commissioner of Customs contesting the penalty imposed on appellants under section 114 A of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant argued that in a live consignment, the duty cannot be demanded\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324184","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67520"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=324184"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324184\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/319582"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=324184"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=324184"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=324184"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}