1987 (10) TMI 306 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Misdeclaration of goods.
2. Under-valuation of imported goods.
3. Unauthorised importation.
4. Imposition of redemption fine and penalty.
5. Determination of assessable value of goods.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Misdeclaration of Goods:
The Customs authorities suspected that the imported goods were misdeclared. The appellants described the goods as "Zip Fastners" and not as "Polyester Zippers," which the Customs authorities alleged was a misdeclaration. The appellants argued that the non-addition of trade nomenclature did not amount to misdeclaration. The Tribunal found no document to show that the imported goods were Nylon Zippers, as alleged by the Customs, and thus did not attach importance to the findings of the Collector regarding misdeclaration.

2. Under-valuation of Imported Goods:
The Customs authorities alleged that the imported goods were undervalued. The appellants claimed that the goods were rejected stock and dead stock, which justified the low price. They provided evidence that the goods had been shipped from Japan to Singapore and back, causing deterioration. The Tribunal noted that the price list and the invoice price in respect of Suhag Traders could not be relied on in toto nor rejected completely. The Tribunal concluded that the value of the goods should be somewhere between what the department found and what the appellants pleaded.

3. Unauthorised Importation:
The Customs authorities held that there was unauthorised importation. The appellants argued that the transaction was genuine and that the goods were purchased at a negotiated price. The Tribunal found that the manner in which the goods were purchased without correspondence, offer, negotiations, and documentation did not inspire complete confidence in the total bona fides of the transaction.

4. Imposition of Redemption Fine and Penalty:
The Collector imposed a redemption fine and a penalty on the appellants. The Tribunal ordered that the redemption fine imposed be reduced to Rs. 75,000 and the penalty be reduced to Rs. 25,000, considering the circumstances of the case.

5. Determination of Assessable Value of Goods:
The Customs authorities valued the goods at Rs. 3,34,735, while the appellants declared the value as Rs. 1,28,035. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence and arguments, decided that the value of the goods for purposes of assessment and ITC should be Rs. 2,23,147. The Tribunal noted that the appellants produced licenses for goods worth Rs. 1,28,033, leaving goods valued at Rs. 95,114 as uncovered by licenses. Customs duty was to be charged on the value ordered by the Tribunal.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal reducing the redemption fine and penalty and revising the assessable value of the imported goods. The Tribunal's decision balanced the evidence and arguments presented by both sides, arriving at a fair conclusion regarding the value and penalties.