Case law

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal · 16 Feb 2024

Shm Shipcare P Ltd vs Mumbai-Air Cargo Import

Legal principle

Manufacture in a customs bonded warehouse under Sections 58 and 65 is a duty-deferment scheme: import duty on raw materials consumed in the final product is payable only on clearance of the final product under Section 68 by the proper officer, and absent any incorrect or false declaration, the goods cannot be confiscated under Section 111(m) or penalised under Section 112.

Court decision

The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original confirming the duty demand with interest, the Section 114A penalty, the confiscation and the redemption fine, and allowed the appeals. It held that imported raw materials/inputs consumed in final products manufactured in a private bonded warehouse licensed under Sections 58 and 65 are not liable for payment of import duties at the time of clearance of such final products as demanded, and that, since the Commissioner himself found no evidence of any incorrect or false declaration, there was no violation of Section 111(m), no confiscation, and no consequential Section 112 penalty.

Facts

SHM Shipcare Pvt. Ltd. held a private bonded warehouse licence under Section 58 and a licence for manufacture of 'High-Speed FRP Boats' under Section 65 of the Customs Act, 1962, importing raw materials without payment of duty. Instead of filing ex-bond Bills of Entry for the warehoused raw materials at the port of import (ACC, Sahar), it filed manual ex-bond Bills of Entry at New Custom House, Mumbai for clearance of the Boats, claiming a 'Nil' duty exemption entry of Notification No. 50/2017-Customs (quoting S.No. 558 instead of the applicable 559). On information from the New Custom House, the Department issued SCN dated 14.01.2022 proposing demand of Rs. 4,51,52,580 as customs duty with interest on the raw materials under Section 28(4), confiscation under Section 111(m), and penalties under Sections 112(a)/(b), 114A and 114AA. The Commissioner confirmed the demand with interest, imposed 100% mandatory penalty under Section 114A, confiscated raw materials valued at Rs. 23,09,22,239 and offered release on a redemption fine of Rs. 2,30,00,000 under Section 125(1).

Key provisions