9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
Allegations of overvaluation of goods in export transactions; Confiscation of pre-recorded cassettes; Imposition of penalties under section 114(1) of the Customs Act, 1962; Mis-declaration of value and description of goods; Violation of FERA, 1973 or FEMA, 1999; Justification for confiscation and penalty; Applicability of Supreme Court's decision in CC (EP) v. Prayag Exporters Pvt. Ltd.; Observations made by the Commissioner of Customs; Contravention of provisions of the Customs Act; Value of the intellectual property in exported goods; Absence of motive for overvaluation. Analysis: The case involved allegations of overvaluation of goods in export transactions by M/s. Globe Entertainments, specifically pre-recorded cassettes of a television serial. The Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai, ordered the confiscation of the cassettes and imposed penalties under section 114(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner based the decision on statements recorded during the investigation, indicating misdeclaration of value and purposeful overvaluation for income-tax benefits. The appellants contended that the exports were made in accordance with agreements with foreign buyers, and the entire remittance was received through proper channels. They argued that the value declared on the shipping bill was as per the agreements, emphasizing that the intellectual property value of the serial was the core issue, not just the material cost. The appellants also highlighted that there was no violation of FERA, 1973 or FEMA, 1999, as the export value was received from the buyer, and the goods were not dutiable or prohibited. The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner's findings, stating that the transaction fulfilled the terms of the contract, and any potential income-tax benefits were a separate matter for the Income-tax authorities. The Tribunal emphasized that the value of the exported goods was not solely based on material cost but also included the intellectual property value of the serial. Since there was no contravention of Customs Act provisions and no motive for overvaluation, the confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties were deemed unjustified. Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing both appeals and providing consequential relief to the appellants. The decision highlighted the importance of considering the intellectual property value in export transactions and the absence of a motive for overvaluation in non-dutiable goods.
|
