Page 220 - ELT_3rd_1st May 2020_Vol 372_Part

442 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

signments is also upheld. The penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act,
1962, in respect of past consignments is also upheld.
9. A separate penalty of Rs. 50 lakhs under Section 114A of the Cus-
toms Act, 1962, has been imposed on Shri Sanjay Patel. Hon’ble High Court of
Gujarat, in the case of Jai Prakash Motwani - 2010 (258) E.L.T. 204 (Guj.), has held
that when penalty has been imposed on the firm, separate penalty on partner
cannot be imposed. Respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble High Court,
the appeal of Shri Sanjay Patel is allowed.
10. The appeal of M/s. Mulchand M. Zaveri is partly allowed. The ap-
peal of Sanjay Patel is allowed.
(Pronounced in the Court on 5-12-2019)
_______
2020 (372) E.L.T. 442 (Tri. - Bang.)

IN THE CESTAT, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, BANGALORE
[COURT NO. I]
S/Shri S.S. Garg, Member (J) and P. Anjani Kumar, Member (T)
PACE INDIA
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE
Final Order No. A/21227/2019, dated 17-12-2019 in Appeal No. C/20549/2019-DB
Redemption fine - Adjudication order of re-export of goods on pay-
ment of redemption fine in excess of jurisdiction conferred by Statute - Provi-
sions of Customs Act, 1962 do not provide for re-export of imported goods on
payment of redemption fine - Ratio of decision in HBL Power Systems Ltd.
[2018 (362) E.L.T. 856 (Tribunal)], squarely applicable - Impugned order not
sustainable in law and therefore set aside - Section 125 of Customs Act, 1962.
[para 5.1]
Confiscation - Misdeclaration for imported goods - Small solar Cells
imported from Singapore and Germany - Misdeclaration and erroneous classi-
fication, Allegation of - Revenue classifying impugned goods as ‘scrap/waste
solar cells’ solely on the ground that imported goods found to be broken solar
cells of different sizes - HELD : Purchase Orders, Bills of Entry and Packing
List as well as commercial invoices clearly mentioning description of item as
‘small solar cells’ (uneven cut solar cells) – Classification of imported goods on
basis of broken solar cells, as scrap/waste, not tenable in law because substan-
tial quantity not found to be in broken condition – Assessee cannot be held
responsible for broken silicon wafer found during investigation as imported
small solar cells/panel very fragile in nature and damage occurred on account
of mis-handling during investigation - Both authorities have misread and mis-
construed reports submitted by IISc., CPCB and KSPCB; and statement rec-
orded during investigation, wrongly relied upon - Report of CPCB, clarifying
that scrap of solar cells (broken/small pieces of silicon wafers) not appearing
in any of Schedule of the Hazardous and other Wastes (Management & Trans-
boundary Movement) Rules, 2016 - Further, technical write up of cut solar
cells clearly proves that small solar cells can be used for various solar applica-
tions depending upon the size starting from 3w to 350w and cut/small solar
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st May 2020  220