2001 (7) TMI 795 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of Z.P. Sliders with an option to redeem on payment of fine.
2. Dispute regarding the imported scrap and its classification.
3. Valuation of the imported goods and justification for confiscation.
4. Reliance on previous decisions and their applicability to the current case.
5. Request for mutilation of the goods and its impact on the case.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the confiscation of Z.P. Sliders with an option to redeem on payment of a fine. The appellant, a scrap dealer, imported scrap from Germany, with a dispute over a portion of the scrap. The appellant argued that the sliders were scrap and not usable, supported by various pieces of evidence and expert opinions.

2. The Customs Authorities classified the goods as slide fasteners instead of scrap, leading to the dispute. The appellant contended that the goods were sold as scrap due to being slow-moving stock. The manufacturer's opinion favored the goods being sliders, but the sequence of events indicated they were sold as scrap.

3. The valuation of the goods was a crucial aspect of the case. The Department relied on average discounts from unrelated cases to determine the value. However, evidence showed that the sliders were sold as scrap for their metal content, justifying a different valuation method. The request for mutilation to prove the goods were scrap was also a significant point of contention.

4. The Commissioner's reliance on previous decisions to treat the goods as a stock lot was challenged by the appellant. The appellant argued that the circumstances of the current case differed from those in the cited judgments, emphasizing the actual transaction value and the lack of justification for using unrelated data for valuation.

5. The request for mutilation of the goods to confirm their scrap nature was a key aspect. The Tribunal directed the Department to mutilate the sliders under Customs Officer supervision, with costs borne by the appellant. The decision was based on the evidence presented, indicating that the goods were intended for scrap and not resale as functional sliders, thus allowing the appeal and setting aside the impugned order.