2008 (7) TMI 797 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Mis-declaration of goods under DEPB scheme, correct declared price of goods, denial of DEPB claim, confiscation of goods, imposition of penalty.

Mis-declaration of goods under DEPB scheme:
The appellant exported Aluminium casting under DEPB scheme but faced issues as the metal content was found to be 85% only, leading the Revenue to question if the castings qualified as articles of Aluminium. The DGFT clarified that DEPB benefit applies only to items made of pure Aluminium, not alloys. The appellant argued that the goods contained 95% Aluminium and were made from Aluminium ingots. The tribunal noted that the description did not specify a percentage, and since the goods were made of Aluminium without extraneous material, mis-declaration charges were unfounded.

Correct declared price of goods:
The Revenue doubted the declared price of the goods, alleging overvaluation. Market inquiries suggested a price range of Rs. 100-200 per kg, while the appellant's price was Rs. 981.57 per kg. The appellant contended that market inquiry results were not shared and provided invoices showing higher prices for similar goods. The tribunal found no evidence to compare the goods' quality and prices, thus overturning the overvaluation claim.

Denial of DEPB claim, confiscation of goods, imposition of penalty:
The Revenue denied DEPB benefit, confiscated the goods, and imposed a penalty due to alleged mis-declaration and overvaluation. The tribunal ruled that since the goods were Die Casting of Aluminium, with no specified Aluminium content percentage required under heading 61, mis-declaration charges were baseless. Additionally, without evidence of comparable goods in the market, the overvaluation claim lacked merit. Thus, the tribunal set aside the confiscation and penalty, granting relief to the appellant.

This judgment emphasizes the importance of accurate description and valuation of goods for export benefits, highlighting the need for clear guidelines and evidence in customs disputes. The tribunal's decision to dismiss mis-declaration and overvaluation charges showcases the significance of factual evidence and market comparables in resolving trade disputes effectively.