Page 140 - ELT_15th August 2020_Vol 373_Part 4

474 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

asked to pay a redemption of fine of Rs. 1,92,000/- under Section 125 of the Cus-
toms Act, 1962 and penalty of Rs. 38,000/- under Section 112(a) of the Customs
Act, 1962.
3. It appears that the petitioner had waived the issue of Show Cause
and therefore, a spot adjudication order was passed on 24-7-2011. The reason
given for confiscating the gold chains from the person of the petitioner reads as
under :-
The person is an Indian National. He has brought the above said 32 Nos. of
gold chains and attempted to pass through green channel without declaring
to customs. He has admitted in his statement that the gold was given to him
by somebody in Singapore for handling over to an unknown person in
Chennai for a monetary benefit of Rs. 3,000/-. His stay abroad is more than
six months, hence he is eligible for concessional rate of duty as per the noti-
fication No. 31/2003, dated 1-3-2003 as amended. However, the person was
not in possession of sufficient foreign currency for payment of duty. As the
person has not declared the gold, the same is liable to confiscation under
Section 111(l) and (m) and the person is liable to penal action under Section
112 of the Customs Act, 1962.
4. The findings of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Airport)
reads as under :-
“Person did not declare the goods. Did not have foreign currency to pay
duty. Since intention was to evade duty, goods liable for confiscation.”
5. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the
Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) in Appeal No. 171/2012-Air. By an order
dated 20-3-2012, the 2nd respondent Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) has
disposed the said appeal with the following observations :-
Moreover, I find that the appellant is an Indian National and has stayed
abroad for more than six months, hence he is eligible for concessional rate
of duty as per the Notification No. 31/2003, dated 1-3-2003 as amended.
I also find that there is no previous offence case registered against the ap-
pellant. Taking overall circumstances of the case, I find that the redemption
find and the penalty imposed are on the higher side. Therefore, in the inter-
est of the justice and fair play, I reduce the redemption fine to Rs. 1,55,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh Fifty Five Thousand Only) and the penalty to
Rs. 19,000/- (Rupees Nineteen Thousand Only).
6. Thus, the redemption fine of Rs. 1,92,000/- was reduced to
Rs. 1,55,000/- imposed under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the pen-
alty of Rs. 38,000/- was reduced to Rs. 19,000/- under Section 112(a) of the Cus-
toms Act, 1962 and benefit of Notification No. 31/2003, dated 1-3-2003 was al-
lowed to the petitioner.
7. The 3rd respondent Revisional Authority vide impugned order dat-
ed 18-1-2013 has upheld the said order of the 2nd respondent Commissioner of
Customs (Appeals). Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition has been
filed by the petitioner.
8. It is submitted by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that the pe-
titioner was an eligible passenger within the meaning of Notification No.
31/2003-Cus., dated 1-3-2003.
9. It is therefore submitted that the 1st respondent erred in imposing
and upholding penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 and Re-
demption fine under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962.
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th August 2020  140