2013 (8) TMI 780 - AT - Customs

Mis-declaration of the value as well as quantity - revenue pleaded that undue relief was granted by Commissioner (Appeals) to the assessee basing on a FAX Message of the exporter stating that due to typing error the weight of citrine exported was typed wrongly Held that - The discrepancy in quantity and inadvertent error been brought to notice of Customs at the time of clearance were not bonafide - fabricated document was used in defence subsequent to adjudication - Innocence before Commissioner (Appeals) was pleaded falsely - plea of respondent accepted was totally baseless and detrimental to interest of justice - FAX message on record cannot be considered as credible to appreciate innocence of respondent decided in favour of revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Mis-declaration of value and quantity in the import of Cut and Polished Semi Precious Stones. Granting of undue relief by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) based on a questionable FAX message. Discrepancy in valuation of goods. Fabrication of documents in defense after adjudication. Acceptance of baseless plea by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals).

Issue 1: Mis-declaration of value and quantity

The case involved the import of Cut and Polished Semi Precious Stones with mis-declared value and quantity. The goods were imported by M/s. C.A. Gems, Hong Kong, and upon valuation by an approved valuer, serious discrepancies were found. The respondent did not dispute the discrepancies but attempted to justify it by referring to a FAX message regarding a typing error in the quantity of citrine exported. The FAX message was not dated, not received by the Customs office, and was presented before the ld. Commissioner for the first time. The respondent failed to notify Customs of the error during clearance, and the fabricated document was used only after adjudication, raising questions about the respondent's bonafide intentions.

Issue 2: Granting of undue relief based on a FAX message

The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) granted undue relief to the respondent based on a questionable FAX message from the exporter, M/s C.A. Gems, Hong Kong. The FAX message claimed a typing error in the weight of citrine exported, but its credibility was in doubt due to its late submission, lack of date, and absence of receipt by Customs. The ld. Commissioner's acceptance of this baseless plea was deemed detrimental to the interest of justice, as it was used as a defense after adjudication, without notifying Customs during clearance. The Tribunal found the FAX message to be unreliable and not credible in establishing the innocence of the respondent.

Issue 3: Discrepancy in valuation of goods

The valuation of the imported goods by an approved valuer, Shri Kishan Das Jhanwar, revealed significant discrepancies in the declared value and quantity. The discrepancies were not contested by the respondent, except for a feeble argument regarding the FAX message highlighting a typing error in the quantity of citrine exported. The discrepancies in valuation were left undisputed, and the respondent's attempt to justify them using a questionable document after adjudication was not accepted as a valid defense by the Tribunal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found that the discrepancies in the import of Cut and Polished Semi Precious Stones, the reliance on a questionable FAX message, and the fabrication of documents after adjudication warranted the reversal of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) order. The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal in full, emphasizing the importance of notifying Customs of errors during clearance and maintaining transparency in import transactions to uphold the interest of justice.