2013 (12) TMI 464 - AT - Customs

Valuation of goods - Enhancement in value of goods - Held that - machine was declared by the appellant as second-hand machine in the Bill of Entry and the said declaration has been accepted by the adjudicating authority. Therefore, the machine is new one is not sustainable as the same has not been challenged by them - it is a second-hand machine and has imported by the appellant on negotiated price from the Belgium trader. The invoice price shown by the appellants has also been supported by two Chartered Engineers one from the supplier side and one appointed by the Revenue to ascertain the price of the imported machine. As both the Chartered Engineers have certified that the price of the imported machine in the invoice is reasonable - the charge of undervaluation is not sustainable and there is no question of loading of the value on value shown by the appellant in the Bill of Entry. Accordingly the impugned order is set aside, value shown by the appellant in the Bill of Entry is accepted - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to the enhancement of value of imported goods.

Analysis:
The appellant challenged the enhancement of value of imported goods, specifically a Hippotronic make machine. The declared value of the machine was Rs. 2,60,79,210, but upon examination, it was found to be a new machine with a current value of 6.5 lakhs Euro. The appellant contended that they negotiated the price with a trader in Belgium, declared the negotiated price in the Bill of Entry, and provided a Chartered Engineer certificate to support the reasonableness of the negotiated price. The department-appointed Chartered Accountant also indicated the price was reasonable. The appellant maintained that the loading of value by the Commissioner was not sustainable.

The department argued that the machine was new and not second-hand, as it had never been used. They supported the value enhancement by stating that the loading of value was reasonable and should be accepted. After hearing both sides, the Tribunal considered the contentions.

The Tribunal noted that the appellant had declared the machine as second-hand, a declaration accepted by the adjudicating authority. Since the appellant's declaration was not challenged on appeal, the argument that the machine was new was deemed unsustainable. Additionally, it was found that the machine was imported at a negotiated price from a trader in Belgium, with support from two Chartered Engineers certifying the reasonableness of the invoice price.

Based on these observations, the Tribunal concluded that the charge of undervaluation was not sustainable. Therefore, the value shown by the appellant in the Bill of Entry was accepted, and the impugned order was set aside. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any.

This judgment highlights the importance of accurate declaration of goods' value during importation, the role of supporting documentation such as Chartered Engineer certificates, and the need for consistency in challenging declarations throughout the adjudication process.