2003 (1) TMI 589 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation and undervaluation of White Poppy Seeds and Yellow Poppy Seeds imported from Turkey.
2. Confiscation under Section 111(d) for violation of DGFT Notification.
3. Rejection of transaction value method for valuation under Customs Valuation Rules.
4. Confiscation under Section 111(m) and penalization when transaction value method is rejected.

Issue 1: Confiscation and Undervaluation of Seeds
The appeal involved issues concerning the confiscation and undervaluation of White Poppy Seeds and Yellow Poppy Seeds imported from Turkey. The appellant's counsel argued that a previous decision by the Tribunal favored the appellants in a similar case, requesting a stay based on the similarities in the issues.

Issue 2: Confiscation under Section 111(d) for Violation of DGFT Notification
One of the main issues was whether a consignment could be confiscated under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act for violating a DGFT Notification. The question arose due to the timing of registration with the Narcotics Commissioner in relation to the date of shipment and physical import. The appellant sought a waiver of pre-deposit of penalty during the appeal.

Issue 3: Rejection of Transaction Value Method for Valuation
Another issue was the rejection of the transaction value method for valuation of the imported goods under Customs Valuation Rules. The appellant contested the Commissioner's decision to adopt an alternative valuation method, questioning the justification for such rejection.

Issue 4: Confiscation under Section 111(m) and Penalization
The issue of confiscation under Section 111(m) and penalization when the transaction value method was rejected was also raised. The Commissioner's decision to confiscate the goods and impose penalties based on an alternative valuation method was challenged by the appellants.

The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both parties. While the appellant relied on a previous decision favoring them, the Respondent attempted to distinguish the issues based on the color of the poppy seeds. The Tribunal, noting the similarities with the previous decision, waived the pre-deposit of duty and penalty during the appeal process. However, a Member of the Tribunal disagreed with the notion that all issues were covered by the previous decision, particularly regarding the valuation method. Despite this disagreement, the Tribunal decided to waive the pre-deposit of penalty during the appeal, emphasizing the need to address the question of confiscation and penalization when alternative valuation methods are applied.