Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Futan Leathers Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
Appeal Number : Customs Appeal No. 42369 of 2013
Date of Judgement/Order : 12/09/2023
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Futan Leathers Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)

CESTAT Chennai held that imposition of redemption fine and penalties when goods were provisionally released, reprocessed and exported after re-processing is unjustified and hence liable to be set aside.

Facts- The appellants filed shipping bills for the export of an item declared as “Goat shoe suede pure finished leather” through Customs House Agent (CHA) M/s. Kalki Shipping Associates. On examination it was seen that the consignments in respect of Shri ALM Leather Exports and M/s. Futan Leathers did not conform to the standards of finished leather. Samples were drawn and sent for testing to CLRI, Chennai. The report was received stating that the goods did not fulfil the standard of finished leather as per public notice no.21/2009/14 dated 1/12/2009 for the reason that the processes of dyeing and shaving/snuffing had not been done. The appellants thereafter got provisional release of the goods, and after reprocessing the goods were exported.

The department issued the present Show Cause Notice alleging the attempted export of prohibited goods and proposing to confiscate the goods, to impose redemption file and penalties. After due process of law, the original authority held that as the goods which were unfinished leather were attempted to be exported as finished leather, the goods were liable for confiscation. As goods were already provisionally released and re-exported after reprocessing, the adjudicating authority imposed redemption fines and penalties.

Conclusion- Held that the goods were provisionally released, reprocessed and exported. Thus the goods are not available for confiscation at the time of passing the order by the adjudicating authority. In a similar situation, when the goods were exported after re-processing, in the case of Vijayalakshmi Leathers Vs. CC, Chennai it was held that the imposition of redemption fine and penalties are required to be set aside.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031