Kwick Cargo Tracers & Lifters Vs Commissioner of Customs (NS-III) (CESTAT Mumbai)
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai, delivered an order in the appeal filed by Kwick Cargo Tracers & Lifters, a Custom House Agent (CHA) and a co-noticee, challenging a penalty of ₹1 lakh imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The penalty was levied by the Commissioner of Customs, NS-III, JNCH, Nhava Sheva, via an Order-in-Original dated January 6, 2017.
The main noticee in the original proceedings was M/s. Sirthai Superware India Ltd., the importer of the goods, identified as ‘Melamine ware viz. Kitchenware and Tableware.’ The same impugned order had confirmed a demand for differential customs duty, along with interest and an equivalent penalty, on the importer.
The Tribunal noted that M/s. Sirthai Superware India Ltd. had previously challenged the same order before CESTAT. In a final order dated October 10, 2019, CESTAT had set aside the penalty of ₹1,00,000/- imposed on the importer under Section 112(a). Critically, the Tribunal observed that the case was one of “mere erroneous classification” and that the provisions of Section 111, concerning the liability of goods to confiscation, were not applicable when the goods corresponded to the declaration regarding description and value. Based on this prior finding that the goods were not liable for confiscation under Section 111, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty imposed on the main noticee under Section 112(a) was unsustainable.
