2004 (1) TMI 265 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Appeal against enhancement of value of imported monitors, confiscation of goods, imposition of fine and penalty without specific license for import of second-hand goods.

Analysis:

1. Enhancement of Value of Imported Monitors:
The appeal was against the Commissioner's decision to enhance the value of imported monitors under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The appellants had declared the monitors as "Used Monitor 14 SVGA Analog" from a Korean company. The Chartered Engineers assessed the total CIF value higher than the declared value, leading to the department fixing the value at Rs. 24,71,365. The appellants argued that the imported goods were second-hand and the Chartered Engineer's assessment should be accepted. However, they admitted to contravening the import policy. The Tribunal noted the import of second-hand goods without a specific license was in violation of the law, leading to the rightful confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties.

2. Confiscation of Goods and Imposition of Fine and Penalty:
The Tribunal acknowledged the department's enhancement of the value after due depreciation calculations. While upholding the confiscation and penalties, the Tribunal found the need to reduce the quantum of redemption fine and penalty due to the old and used nature of the goods. The redemption fine was reduced from Rs. 5,00,000 to Rs. 2.50 lakhs, and the penalty was reduced from Rs. 2.50 lakhs to Rs. 1,00,000. The Tribunal justified the reduction based on the significant difference between the declared value, assessed value, and the enhanced value by the department under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.

3. Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal except for the modifications in the quantum of redemption fine and penalty. The decision highlighted the importance of adhering to import policies and regulations, especially concerning the importation of second-hand goods without the necessary license. The judgment emphasized the authority's right to enhance the value of goods based on due depreciation calculations, while also recognizing the need for proportionate penalties considering the circumstances of the case.