Case Law Details
Ram Prasath Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
Introduction: In a recent case, Ram Prasath vs Commissioner of Customs, CESTAT Chennai made a pivotal decision to reduce the redemption fine related to the delayed re-export order of Kiwi Fruits. The appellant faced penalties under Sections 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. We delve into the details of the case and the implications of the CESTAT order.
Detailed Analysis: The appellant filed four Bills of Entry for the import of Kiwi Fruits, believed to be of Chilean origin, at M/s.Kern ICD, Madurai. An alert from NCTC, Mumbai, suggested the possibility of Iranian origin, leading to a thorough examination. The investigation revealed Iranian markings on the crates and fumigation markings on pallets. Further scrutiny exposed forged Phytosanitary certificates, and the imported goods were undervalued.
The Plant Protection Officer ordered deportation, citing forged certificates. The appellant sought re-export, waiving a show cause notice. The original authority ordered confiscation of the goods valued at Rs.1,21,15,314/-, with a redemption fine of Rs.20,00,000/-. A penalty of Rs.10 lakhs was imposed on the appellant, later reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals).
The appellant argued against the delay in the Commissioner’s order, claiming hardship due to deteriorated goods. The Commissioner noted the lack of profit margin and huge demurrage charges. The CESTAT Chennai reduced the redemption fine to Rs.5 lakhs, and penalties under Sections 112(a) and 114AA to Rs.4,00,000/- and Rs.8,00,000/- respectively.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
