M/S Khattar Export Pvt. Ltd vs Cc (Import) Nhavasheva

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVECE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT NO. IV

APPEAL NO. C/89093/13

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 610 (DNODE)/2013/EXP/137 dated 28.06.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-II.)

For approval and signature: Honble Shri P.S. Pruthi, Member (Technical)

=====================================================

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the : Yes CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen of the order?

4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities? =====================================================

M/s Khattar Export Pvt. Ltd.

: Appellant Versus

CC (Import) Nhavasheva : Respondent

Appearance Written Submission : For Appellant Shri M.K. Mall, Asst. Commr. (A.R.) : For Respondent

CORAM: HONBLE SHRI P.S. PRUTHI, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Date of Hearing : 30.01.2015 Date of Decision: 30.01.2015

ORDER NO.......................................................

Per: P.S. Pruthi:

The appellant has made written submission requesting the case to be decided on the basis of grounds of appeal filed by them. The facts of the case are that the appellant filed a Shipping Bill for export of Cotton Powerloom Ladies Blouse, Viscose Powerloom Ladies blouse, Viscose Powerloom Ladies trouser and Viscose Powerloom Ladies skirts, having FOB value of Rs. 82,94,475/- under Drawback scheme. On examination, the goods were found to be different in respect of 4 items out of total 8 items declared in the Shipping Bill. These 4 items were declared as Viscose powerloom Ladies blouse for which each Drawback Rate is 9.1% of the FOB value; whereas on examination they were found to be Blend, containing cotton and manmade fibre, for which Drawback Rate is 8.2% / 7.1%. Thus there was a difference of Rs. 63,167.19/- in the drawback claimed as excess. The goods were confiscated and allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- under Section 125 of Customs Act, 1962. Penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was also imposed on the appellant. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the adjudicating authority.

2. The grounds of appeal filed by the appellant state that:-

(i) The mistake was unintentional. Out of 8 items, the description was given wrongly in respect of 4 items. In these items also the garment was declared correctly, only fabric content was not declared correctly.

(ii) Various judgments were relied in which the fine and penalty have been reduced keeping in view the amount of excess drawback claimed.

2. The learned AR reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals).

3. I find that the goods have been rightly confiscated, in view of the clear misdeclaration made by the appellant resulting in excess claim of drawback to the tune of Rs. 63,167.19/-. However, keeping in view the amount of excess drawback claimed in comparison to the FOB value of Rs. 82,94,475/-, I find that this is a fit case for reduction of fine and penalty. Accordingly, the redemption fine is reduced to Rs. 65,000/- and the penalty is reduced to Rs. 25,000/-. Appeal is partially allowed in above terms.

(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)

(P.S. Pruthi)

Member (Technical)

Sp

3