2024 (5) TMI 1006 - AT - Customs

Mis-declaration Of Import value - duty demand - confiscation of goods - penalty - Imports semi-conductor fabrication system - benefit of Notification No.52/2003-Cus. - export obligation - 100% EOU engaged in the business of providing software development services - HELD THAT - It is on record that the appellant had declared the value as shown in the proforma invoice as declared by their supplier. After inspection since the goods were found to be used goods and the value was enhanced by the Chartered Engineer they accepted the enhanced value which will have an impact on their export obligation. As rightly claimed by the appellant there is no duty liability and the declared value was based on the proforma invoice hence there was no mis-declaration as such. Therefore I do not find any suppression or mis-declaration by the appellant so as to confiscate the goods. Hence the order of confiscation is set aside along with the penalty imposed on the appellant u/s 112(a)(ii).

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against Order-in-Appeal involving mis-declaration of import value, confiscation of goods, and penalty under Customs Act, 1962.

Mis-declaration of Import Value:
The appellant, a 100% EOU, imported semi-conductor fabrication system under Notification No.52/2003-Cus. The Chartered Engineer appraised the goods as used, leading to a declared value discrepancy. The Commissioner upheld confiscation and penalty under Sections 125 and 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Appellant's Submission:
The appellant argued that as per the law and Foreign Trade Policy, there was no requirement to declare the goods as 'used'. They contended that the value declaration was based on the parent company's invoice, citing relevant case laws to support their stance.

Revenue's Position:
The Authorized Representative reiterated the Commissioner's findings regarding the confiscation and penalty.

Judgment:
The Tribunal noted that the appellant had declared the value based on the supplier's proforma invoice and had voluntarily sought a First Check assessment. The Chartered Engineer's assessment of used goods led to an enhanced value, impacting the export obligations. As there was no duty liability and no intentional mis-declaration, the confiscation and penalty were set aside. The appeal was allowed on the basis of these findings.