2014 (4) TMI 57 - AT - Customs

Waiver of pre deposit - Valuation of goods - Enhancement in value of goods - Held that - Lower authorities have also relied on the confessional statements given by the partner of the firm, wherein he had admitted having paid extra consideration to the supplier in respect of the subject consignment. According to the authorities, these confessional statements coupled with the fax message would be enough to raise differential duty demand on the importer and to penalise them - the aforesaid fax message pertained to later imports - valid reason for the appellants to claim prima facie case. Accordingly, there will be waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of duty and penalty amounts - Stay granted.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Import of Viscose Filament Yarn, enhancement of value based on fax message, demand of duty and penalties, admission of extra consideration by the importer, relevance of confessional statements, applicability of previous tribunal decisions on similar issues, waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Import of Viscose Filament Yarn:
The applicants imported Viscose Filament Yarn, declaring specific unit values in the Bill of Entry dated 13.04.2004. The issue revolves around the declared values and the subsequent enhancement based on a fax message.

2. Enhancement of Value based on Fax Message:
The value declared by the applicants was allegedly enhanced following a fax message dated 17.07.2005. This enhancement led to a demand for duty amounting to Rs.2,19,384/- in both cases, in addition to penalties.

3. Admission of Extra Consideration:
The Revenue's Authorized Representative contended that the applicants had admitted to paying extra consideration to the supplier, as per their statements. This admission played a crucial role in the case.

4. Relevance of Confessional Statements:
The confessional statements made by the partner of the firm, admitting to the payment of extra consideration, were considered by the authorities. The significance of these statements in determining duty liability and penalties was a key aspect of the case.

5. Applicability of Previous Tribunal Decisions:
The Tribunal referred to a previous stay order in the applicant's own case concerning a similar issue dated 08.12.2003. The decision in the earlier case, granting unconditional stay based on specific grounds, influenced the current judgment.

6. Waiver of Pre-Deposit and Stay of Recovery:
In line with the previous tribunal decision and considering the circumstances, the tribunal decided to waive the pre-deposit of duty and penalties, along with interest, until the appeal's final disposal. This decision was crucial in providing relief to the appellants.

7. Final Decision and Directions:
Based on the above analysis and following the precedent set by the earlier stay order, the tribunal allowed the stay application, directing the registry to link the current appeal with the previous one. The decision was pronounced in open court, providing clarity on the outcome of the case.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments, and decisions made by the tribunal, offering a detailed understanding of the legal proceedings and their implications.