2017 (1) TMI 10 - AT - Customs

Confiscation of imported goods - second hand machinery - restricted goods - import licence to be procured - Held that - We have also held that the goods are liable for confiscation and hence are to be released only on payment of redemption fine and penalty - In the case of Marque Enterprises vs. C.C. (Preventive), Amritsar, 2015 (4) TMI 201 - CESTAT NEW DELHI the Tribunal has examined various other decisions dealing with import of second-hand photocopiers and has observed that several coordinate Benches have taken a uniform view regarding imposition of redemption fine and penalty to the tune of 10% and 5% respectively. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that redemption fine can be reduced to 10% and 5% of the approved value of the goods. Valuation - second hand machinery - Held that - The nature of the goods is such that the valuation will have to be decided on case to case basis after examining the goods from the point of view of year of manufacture, the present condition of the machinery, expected life span etc. Since it is impossible to find identical contemporaneous import in the case of second-hand equipment, the fixing of price on the basis of the opinion of the Expert Chartered Engineer cannot be faulted with. Appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Import of old and used digital multi-functional printer without specified import license, enhancement of value, confiscation of goods, redemption fine, and penalty.

Import without License Issue:
The appellant imported old and used digital multi-functional printer from South Korea without a specified import license, violating the Foreign Trade Policy. The Customs authorities valued the goods higher than the declared value, and the original adjudicating authority considered the goods restricted for imports, requiring a license. The goods were ordered for confiscation and could be redeemed on payment of redemption fine and penalty. The Tribunal held that since the goods were second-hand and required an import license, they were liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Valuation Issue:
The valuation of the goods was done based on the opinion of an Expert Chartered Engineer, considering factors like the year of manufacture, present condition, and expected lifespan. The Tribunal noted that the valuation of second-hand goods is case-specific and upheld the use of the Chartered Engineer certificate for valuation. Referring to the case of Gajra Bewal, the Tribunal supported the valuation of second-hand machines through Chartered Engineer certification.

Confiscation and Redemption Issue:
The Tribunal found the goods liable for confiscation and could only be released upon payment of redemption fine and penalty. The appellant argued that the imposed redemption fine and penalty were arbitrary and excessive. Citing various case laws, the appellant sought a reduction in the redemption fine and penalty. After reviewing the case laws, the Tribunal reduced the redemption fine to 10% and the penalty to 5% of the approved value of the goods, concluding the appeal in these terms.

This comprehensive summary provides an in-depth analysis of the judgment, covering all the issues involved and the Tribunal's decision on each aspect of the case.