9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Discrepancy in valuation of imported goods. 2. Admissibility of fresh evidence in adjudication. 3. Mis-declaration leading to confiscation and penalties. Issue 1: Discrepancy in valuation of imported goods: The Tribunal directed the original authority to consider additional evidence showing the declared value of US $800 per MT for imported Dried Ginger. However, the Chief Commissioner, during de novo consideration, valued the goods at US $1125 per MT, deviating from the Tribunal's directive. The appellant argued for adopting the contemporaneous import value of US $800 per MT to receive relief in fines and penalties. Issue 2: Admissibility of fresh evidence in adjudication: The appellant contended that the Revenue could not enhance the valuation by introducing fresh evidence during adjudication, as it was not part of the earlier order or the remand directive. The Chief Commissioner's reliance on a higher valuation of US $1125 per MT was challenged, emphasizing the importance of following the Tribunal's instructions and considering the evidence presented earlier. Issue 3: Mis-declaration leading to confiscation and penalties: The Chief Commissioner's decision to rely on fresh evidence for valuation, contrary to the Tribunal's direction, was deemed inappropriate. Despite accepting the evidence of contemporaneous import at US $800 per MT, the mis-declaration by the appellants at US $400 per MT justified the enhancement of value. Consequently, the order of confiscation and imposition of fines and penalties was upheld, with the Tribunal affirming the need to maintain the imposed fines and penalties even with the revised valuation. In conclusion, the Tribunal modified the impugned order, adopting the value of imported Dried Ginger at US $800 per MT and confirming the fines and penalties as imposed. The decision highlighted the importance of following directives and considering relevant evidence in adjudication processes to ensure fair and consistent outcomes in customs matters.
|
