9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Dispute regarding the age of imported conveyor belts curing line. Analysis: The dispute in the present appeal revolves around the age of imported, used, and second-hand conveyor belts curing line. The appellants sought clearance of the goods under para 5.3 of Exim Policy and para 5.4 of ITC hand-book, claiming that the goods were less than ten years old. The appellants provided the supplier's invoice and an independent Chartered Engineer's certificate to support their contention that the machine was of 1992 make, thus less than 10 years old. The Commissioner, however, relied on the examination report by the department's machinery experts, which stated that the machine was manufactured in 1963, making it more than 10 years old. The Commissioner confiscated the goods and imposed a redemption fine of Rs. 12 lakhs and a personal penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. Upon hearing both sides, the Tribunal noted that the supplier's invoices and the Chartered Engineer's certificate indicated the goods were of 1992 origin. The genuineness of the certificate was not disputed by the Commissioner. The Tribunal found that the year of manufacture on a small component like a motor does not conclusively determine the age of the entire machinery. The lack of independent expert opinion on the disputed issue further weakened the department's case. The Tribunal also highlighted that the Commissioner's observation regarding the painted tally plate on the main machine did not provide clarity on the actual year of manufacture. Referring to precedent cases, the Tribunal emphasized that a Chartered Engineer's certificate, when genuine, cannot be rejected solely based on another expert certificate without sufficient independent reasons. As the Chartered Engineer's certificate in this case was found to be genuine, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and providing consequential relief to the appellants.
|
