9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Confiscation of imported embroidery machine under Customs Act. 2. Mis-declaration of model, year, and value of the imported machine. 3. Valuation of the machine based on internet data and subsequent auction. 4. Year of manufacture determination based on conflicting evidence. 5. Legal validity of the valuation method adopted by customs authorities. Analysis: 1. The appeal challenged the confiscation of a second-hand embroidery machine imported under the Customs Act. The Commissioner of Customs confiscated the machine due to mis-declaration of model, year, and value, allowing redemption on payment of a fine. A penalty was imposed under relevant sections of the Act. 2. The impugned order fixed the machine's age based on reports and statements indicating mis-declaration by the importers. The appellants contested the valuation method, emphasizing coercion in statements and the faulty basis of internet data for valuation. They argued that the machine's actual price was as declared, and the year of manufacture was correctly stated. 3. The appellants highlighted subsequent developments post-confiscation, indicating innocence and requesting auction of the machine. The auction value contradicted the valuation in the impugned order, raising doubts on the accuracy of the initial valuation based on internet data. 4. The determination of the machine's year of manufacture was disputed, with conflicting evidence from the Indian agent and the Chartered Engineer. The appellants argued that the general statement from the agent should not outweigh the engineer's certification of 1993 manufacture. 5. The Tribunal found the valuation method flawed, as it relied on internet data not reflecting actual transactions. The absence of comparable import data and the significantly lower auction sale price undermined the initial valuation's reliability. The order was set aside, emphasizing the lack of credible evidence supporting the valuation method. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, citing insufficient evidence and unreliable valuation methods in the impugned order. The conflicting information on the machine's year of manufacture and the discrepancy between the auction sale price and the initial valuation cast doubt on the customs authorities' decision, leading to the setting aside of the order.
|
