ORDER
Shri S.L. Peeran
1. The short question that arises for consideration is as to whether the Commissioner of Customs was justified in imposing a fine of Rs.90,000/- on the goods which was confiscated and granted release on payment of fine. The Commissioner has fixed the value of the goods at Rs.3,71,000/- for the entire consignment. He has imposed a penalty of Rs.50,000/- under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act.
2. Ld.Counsel Shri A.K. Jayaraj submits that the appellants are not contesting the case on merits in view of larger bench judgment rendered by the Tribunal in the case of Om Prakash Bhatia Vs. CC [2001 (131) ELT 305] by which the Larger Bench had held that where a person mis declared the value of the goods meant for export to get higher draw back claim, then such goods are liable for confiscation and also for imposition of penalty. He submits that however, the redemption fine arrived at at Rs.30 per meter in so far as the sized is not justified clothes. he contends that there is no evidence except the party’s admission. He seeks for scaling down the redemption fine and penalty. He submits that Rs.50,000/- penalty on the exporter is very high and he has suffered immeasurably due to loss of business. He contends that appellant has shown extenuating circumstance for reduction of fine and penalty.
3. Ld. DR Shri A. Jayachandran submits that there cannot be any argument in this case as regards merits, the issue is covered in favour of Revenue. The Commissioner has noted in detail the modus operandi adopted by the proprietor of the appellants firm in mis declaring the value and quantity of the goods with an idea to claim higher draw back of Rs.7,50,974/-. The value has been reduced in view of appellant’s own admission with regard to the rate of Rs.30/- per meter. The Commissioner is entitled to impose 100% fine in terms of the section. But, however, he has levied less than 40% and the penalty can also be more than five times the value of the goods; while the Commissioner has restricted it to Rs.50,000/- He submits that there is no ground for reduction of redemption fine and penalty.
4. On a careful consideration of the submission, we notice that the appellant is not challenging the merits of the case but only seeking for reduction in fine and penalty due to extenuating circumstance and the amount of loss and suffering undergone by the appellant. In matters pertaining to misdeclaration/suppression and where a party done so with a view to claim higher draw back, the Tribunal has negatived the assessee’s plea for not imposing penalty or draw back in its Larger Bench judgment noted supra. Therefore, there cannot be a case for non levy of fine and penalty. However, taking the extenuating circumstance and the appellant being only a proprietor and having suffered immeasurably, the Redemption Fine is reduced to Rs.80,000/- (Rupees eighty thousand only) and Penalty to Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only). Except for this reduction by Rs.10,000/- each, the order is otherwise confirmed.
(Pronounced & dictated in open Court)