Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Shivam Steel Rolling Mills vs Commissioner Of Central Excise & ... on 18 September, 2017
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SCO 147-148, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH 160 017 COURT NO. I Appeal No. C/59489/2013,C/50821/2015-SM Date of Hearing/ Decision : 18.09.2017 [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. OIA-ASR-CUSTM-PVR-APP-42-13-14 dated 20.06.2013 and OIA-ASR-CUSTM-PVR-288-14-15 dated 09.01.2015 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise & Customs, Ludhiana] For approval and signature: Honble Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) M/s. Shivam Steel Rolling Mills : Appellant M/s. J.S. Steel Traders vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Chandigarh : Respondent
Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Ludhiana Appearance:
Shri Naveen Bindal & Shri Saurabh Kapoor, Advocates for the Appellant(s) Shri Atul Handa, A.R. for the Respondent(s) CORAM:
Honble Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Final Order No. 61898-61899/2017 Per : Ashok Jindal The appellants are in appeal against the impugned orders challenging the redemption fine and penalties imposed on them. As the facts in both the cases are similar, they are taken up together for disposal by a common order.
2. The facts of the case are that the appellant filed bills of entry for clearance of the imported goods. While filing IGM by the shipping line, the goods were declared as Heavy Melting Scrap only whereas, on examination the goods were found to be HMS as well as re-rollable scrap. Therefore, the case was booked against the appellant for mis-declaration of the goods. Consequently, differential duty is to be demanded on re-rollable scrap and goods were held liable for confiscation and to impose redemption fine and penalty. The matter was adjudicated and differential duty on re-rollable scrap was demanded, redemption fine and penalties were also imposed on the appellants, holding that the goods were mis-declared and it is a case of mis-declaration. On appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), redemption fine and penalty was reduced in the case of M/s. Shivam Steel Rolling Mills but in the case of M/s. J.S. Steel Traders, it was not reduced. Aggrieved from the said orders, appellants are before me.
3. Heard the parties, considered the submissions. I find that on the similar issue, a case came up before this Tribunal in the case of A.P. Metals vide Final Order No. 202/2016-CHD dated 02.02.2016 and this Tribunal held that as it was admitted by the appellant that it was mis-declared at the behest of the shipping line while filing the IGM and they accepted the duty liability. As the duty liability has been accepted by the appellant, in that circumstance, I hold that the goods are liable for confiscation and redemption fine and penalties are imposable.
4. Considering the fact that, in the case of M/s. Shivam Steel Rolling Mills, the differential duty is Rs. 1,11,575/- the redemption fine is reduced to Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) and penalty is reduced to Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only). In the case of M/s. J.S. Steel Traders, the differential duty is Rs. 95,538/- and the redemption fine is reduced to Rs. 90,000/- (Rupees ninety thousand only) and the penalty is reduced to Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only).
5. With these terms, both the appeals are disposed of.
(Order dictated and pronounced in the court) Ashok Jindal Member (Judicial) KL 2 Appeal No. C/59489/2013,C/50821/2015