CESTAT quashes Penalty Imposed for Confiscation of Hot rolled steel plates on Ground of Genuine Disclosure of Quantity and Weight of Imported Goods [Read Order]
![CESTAT quashes Penalty Imposed for Confiscation of Hot rolled steel plates on Ground of Genuine Disclosure of Quantity and Weight of Imported Goods [Read Order] CESTAT quashes Penalty Imposed for Confiscation of Hot rolled steel plates on Ground of Genuine Disclosure of Quantity and Weight of Imported Goods [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/CESTAT-Quashes-Penalty-Imposed-CESTAT-Penalty-Confiscation-of-Hot-rolled-steel-plates-Genuine-Disclosure-of-Quantity-Weight-of-Imported-Goods-Hot-rolled-steel-plates-taxscan.jpg)
The Ahmedabad bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the penalty imposed for the confiscation of hot rolled steel plates on the ground of genuine disclosure of quantities and weight of the imported goods.
Kalpataru Transmission Ltd, the appellant assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for confirming the penalty imposed for confiscation of goods under section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962.
S.J Vyas, the counsel for the assessee contended that the number of Hot rolled steel plates are same there was only variation in the weight, and the standard weight was adopted according to the size of the plate and it was calculated theoretically.
Further submitted that despite the correct number of plates the weight varies as the invoicing of the material was not done on an actual weight basis but on a theoretical weight basis.
Also stated that the assessee made the payment of the total invoice value despite the increase in the actual weight of goods and paid the differential custom duty but since there was no mala fide on the part of the assessee.
G.Kirupanandan, the counsel for the department relied on the decisions made by the lower authorities and contended that the assessee mis-declared the quantity of imported goods to evade the payment of Customs duty.
The Bench observed that the assessee had paid the invoice value based on the weight declared in the invoice irrespective that the actual weight was slightly more than the declared weight and the assessee had also discharged the custom duty on the differential weight of the goods and does not find any misdeclaration on the part of the assessee.
A single-member bench comprising Ramesh Nair(Judicial) quashed the penalty imposed for the confiscation of imported goods while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates