Chadhuram Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
In Chadhuram Enterprises vs Commissioner of Customs, CESTAT Chennai dealt with an appeal challenging the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), which upheld the confiscation of imported goods while reducing the redemption fine and penalty imposed by the original adjudicating authority. The appellant had imported Circular Saw Blades without mandatory labeling, leading to confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, with a redemption fine of 竄ｹ5,50,000 and a penalty of 竄ｹ50,000 under Section 112(a).
The primary issue examined by the Tribunal was whether the sustained redemption fine and penalty were justified, given the facts and circumstances of the case. The goods were imported without compliance with the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011, particularly in the absence of labels and the required registration certificate. Though the appellant claimed to have applied for registration, the certificate had not been obtained at the time of import.
The Tribunal acknowledged that the failure to produce the Legal Metrology registration certificate at the time of import amounted to a contravention of the Foreign Trade Policy (2009-2014). As such, the goods were rightly held liable for confiscation under Section 111(d), which covers goods imported contrary to any prohibition under any law in force. Consequently, penal action under Section 112(a) was also justified for knowingly importing goods in contravention of legal provisions.
