9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Valuation of imported goods - Confiscation of goods for mis-declaration - Imposition of penalties Valuation of Imported Goods: The appeals involved the import of "Cyclohexanone," with the Commissioner enhancing the value of the goods from Singapore $515 per MT to US $770 per MT. The Tribunal found that the comparison of goods of Chinese origin with goods from Germany, Italy, or the USA for valuation was not valid as per the definition of "identical goods" and "similar goods." The Tribunal rejected the argument that the appellants could not challenge the value enhancement since they did not contest it earlier, clarifying that the previous order only focused on verifying if the goods were "Cyclohexanone." Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the enhancement of the goods' value. Confiscation of Goods for Mis-Declaration: Regarding the confiscation of goods due to mis-declaration, the Tribunal noted that the importers had declared the brand name "Novosol-55," which was consistent with the "Cyclohexanone" goods supplied by the foreign manufacturer. Samples were taken for testing, and there was no change in duty rates under different classifications. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the goods were not liable for confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962, and overturned the confiscation orders in both cases. Imposition of Penalties: The penalties imposed on the importers were also set aside based on the findings related to the valuation and mis-declaration issues. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, allowed the appeals, and granted consequential relief to the appellants in accordance with the law. The judgment was pronounced in court, concluding the legal proceedings in this matter.
|
