2019 (3) TMI 1443 - AT - Customs

Classification of imported goods - Shell Bangles, Plastic Toys and Kitchen items - re-classification of shell bangles under CTH 9601 9040 and toys of plastics under CTH 9503 0030 - prohibited goods or not - rejection of declared value - Held that - There is no finding on the legal submissions of the assessee nor is there any discussion as to the correctness or otherwise of such submissions and we have to say that the findings arrived at and upheld by the First Appellate Authority, are incoherent as far as the facts are concerned. At this juncture, it is very useful to refer to one of the pleas of the assessee that it had sought for re-export of the goods back to its supplier on account of mis-match and apparently the same is not at all discussed by the lower authorities - also, there is no justification given by the adjudicating authority in re-determining the value at almost ten times the declared value nor is there any working given by the adjudicating authority before arriving at his value. Further, the adjudicating authority has also not discussed about the prevailing market value of the goods involved before imposing redemption fine nor has he discussed about applicability of Section 125 since, admittedly, the Revenue has not made out a case that the goods sought to be imported are prohibited under the Customs Act or under any other law for the time being in force and therefore the redemption fine appears to be disproportionate. Matter remanded back to the file of the adjudicating authority who shall pass a denovo adjudication order, after considering the explanations as also the various case laws relied upon up the assessee - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Reclassification of imported goods, mis-declaration of quantity, rejection of declared value, confiscation of goods, redemption fine imposition.

Analysis:
The appellant imported shell bangles, plastic toys, and kitchen items, declaring a value of ?8,45,517 and a weight of 18000 Kgs. A Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued proposing reclassification and re-determination of value. The Order-in-Original reclassified shell bangles and toys, rejected declared value, and ordered confiscation with an option for redemption with a fine. The Commissioner of Customs upheld the Order-in-Original, leading to the appellant's appeal.

The appellant argued that the demand was excessive compared to the alleged quantity difference, and valuation under the Customs Act should follow specific rules. They claimed the impugned order lacked legal reasoning, evidence for value re-determination, and proper assessment of redemption fine. The appellant sought re-export due to mis-match, which was not addressed by authorities. The adjudicating authority's actions were deemed arbitrary and disproportionate.

The Tribunal noted the absence of findings on legal submissions, incoherence in the lower authorities' decisions, and lack of justification for value re-determination and redemption fine imposition. As a result, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter remanded for denovo adjudication. The adjudicating authority was directed to consider explanations and case laws, provide reasonable opportunities to the appellant, and ensure a lawful denovo adjudication process. All issues were left open for further consideration.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed for remand purposes, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive and legally sound re-evaluation of the case by the adjudicating authority.