Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
(Arising Out Order-In-Appeal ... vs Commissioner Of Customs(Prev.), ... on 11 December, 2017
IN THE CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
Appeal No.
C/85042/16
(Arising out Order-in-Appeal No.MUM-CUSTM-PRV-APPELLANT-429/15-16 dated 12.10.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-Zone-III. )
For approval and signature:
Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see No
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication
in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy Seen
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Yes
authorities?
M/s.Admiral Shipping Ltd.
Appellant
Vs.
Commissioner of Customs(Prev.), Mumbai Zone-III
Respondent
Appearance:
Adjournment Request for the appellant Shri M.K.Mall(AR) for the respondent CORAM:
Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Date of hearing : 11.12.2017 Date of decision : 11.12.2017 O R D E R No: ..
Per: Mrs.Archana Wadhwa.
After rejecting the request for adjournment, I proceed to decide the appeal inasmuch as a short issue is involved.
2. As per facts of the case, vessel M.V. Royal Arsenal (Owned by M/s.Radiant International F.Z.C. Dubai UAE) was scheduled to arrive at Dharamtar Port, Alibag on 05.02.2013 at 15.00 hrs. For unloading 35000 MT of Mill Scale in bulk. Accordingly as per the provisions of Section 30 of the Customs Act, 1962, IGM No.84/12-13 dated 30.01.2013 was filed by the Appellant M/s.Admiral Shipping Ltd., M/s. Radiant International FZC Dubai vide their letter dated 02.02.2013 informed that vessel M.V. Royal Arsenal was not arriving at Dharamtar Port as per their laycan and has been further delayed and that the said vessel had been replaced by M.V. CMB Adrien and requested to allow them to amend name of vessel M.V. Royal Arsenal to Vessel M.V. CMB Adrien in the IGM.
3. After initiation of the proceedings original adjudicating authority imposed penalty of Rs.1.00 Lakh upon the appellant. However, on appeal, Commissioner(Appeals) reduced the penalty to Rs.75,000/- by observing as under:-
5. I have gone through the facts of the case and submission, I find that this is a case where change of name of Vessel has been sought in the IGM. The argument of the appellant that M.V. Royal Arsenal has been delayed and a new vessel M.V. CMB Adrien was arriving for the said purpose, is not convincing and appears to cover up the apparent mistake in filing the IGM with proper details. It is observed that the said agent has not submitted any reason for change in vessels name and the substation by another vessel or Amendment of the name of the vessel doese not come within the purview of amendments as clarified in Circular No.13/2005 dt.11.3.2005. In fact the vessel name cannot be changed in the IGM and therefore giving wrong information in the IGM, asking to change the name of the vessel by the shipping agent without giving sufficient reasons to the proper officer amounts to violation of provisions of Section 30 of the Customs Act, 1962. As regards t othe claim of handing over of letter dt.4.2.2013 to the authorities for cancellation of the IGM, I find that this letter is without any acknowledgement from Customs and the said letter also does not say anything about cancellation of original vessel but the reason cited is delayed thta too without any specific reason.
4. On going through the above order I find that there is no dispute about the fact that the appellant intimated the Customs well within time about change in the vessels name. I have also gone through section 30 of the Customs Act, which requires filing of proper IGs with proper vessels name and does not debar the change in the name of the vessel. The appellant having taken steps well within time, no mala fide can be attributed to them so as call for imposition of penalty. I find no merits in the impugned orders and accordingly set aside the same and allow the appeal with consequential relief.
(Pronounced and dictated in the Court) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) sm 1