9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Valuation of imported printing machinery, discrepancy in machine details, confiscation of goods, enhancement of value, penalty imposition, denial of cross-examination, application of valuation rules, determination of machine value, compliance with import policy, benefit of doubt in confiscation.
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai involved a case where British Printing Press imported a second-hand printing machine, leading to a dispute over the valuation and age of the machinery. The importer provided an invoice and a certificate from a chartered engineer to support the clearance of the goods. However, upon inspection, discrepancies were found in the machine details, prompting a revaluation by a local chartered engineer. The authorities proposed confiscation of the machines due to being older than permitted and enhanced the value. The Additional Commissioner's order included confiscation with an option for redemption on payment of a fine and imposed a penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) later reduced the fine and penalty but upheld the decision. The appellant contended the denial of cross-examination and questioned the basis for valuation and acceptance of the invoice value. The Tribunal noted the lack of support for the valuation given by the local chartered engineer and referred to valuation guidelines based on depreciation. The judgment confirmed the confiscation of Heidelberg machines due to age but set aside the confiscation of Thompson machines due to lack of evidence on their age. The redemption fine and penalty were reduced based on the valuation guidelines and benefit of doubt in confiscation. Ultimately, the appeal was allowed in part, adjusting the redemption fine and penalty amounts accordingly.
|
