9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Import of plant for manufacture of carbon block, enhancement of value of imported goods, confiscation of goods, penalty imposition, certification compliance for import into export-oriented unit. Analysis: 1. The appellant imported a plant for manufacturing carbon blocks from Switzerland in ten consignments. The issue arose concerning the tenth consignment, where certain items were found to be new instead of reconditioned as claimed by the importer. The department proposed enhancement of value, confiscation under Section 111 of the Act, and penalty imposition. 2. The Commissioner's order accepted the value determined by the committee, ordered confiscation with an option to redeem on payment of a fine, and imposed a penalty. Notably, a significant value enhancement was observed for bagging machines, leading to a substantial increase in the declared value. 3. The appellant argued that one of the bagging machines, manufactured in 1983, was considered new by the committee, while the other machine from 1992 had its declared value accepted. The appellant contended that the value for the 1983 machine should be the same as the 1992 machine, as indicated in the invoice, amounting to Rs 21.00 lacs. 4. The analysis further revealed that certain items like electronic typewriter, viscometer, and shaker were acknowledged as new, warranting no interference in their value enhancement. However, discrepancies were noted in the treatment of other items, particularly a restructured item labeled as "ventilator/cooling tower," where the valuation methodology lacked objectivity and justification. 5. Despite a significant difference in the declared value and the department's valuation, the discrepancy was deemed negligible in proportion to the total consignment value. Consequently, confiscation under Section 111 of the Act and penalty imposition were considered unjustifiable. The confiscation ordered under clause (d) of Section 111 was set aside due to compliance with certification requirements for import into the export-oriented unit. 6. The appeal was partially allowed, providing consequential relief to the appellant. The judgment highlighted the need for objective valuation methods, especially in cases where discrepancies in item descriptions and conditions exist, emphasizing the importance of compliance with import certification regulations for export-oriented units.
|
