2001 (4) TMI 256 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Valuation of imported printing machine.
2. Confiscation of goods under Customs Act.
3. Imposition of penalty under Section 112(a) of the Act.

Valuation of Imported Printing Machine:
The case involved an imported four-color offset printing machine declared as a 1991 model but later admitted to be a 1984 model. The Commissioner valued the machine at Rs. 27,06,000 based on an inspection by engineers from the manufacturer's agents. However, the certificate from the agent indicated a value of Rs. 22,60,000 for the machine in 1984. The Commissioner also considered the CIF value of similar machines from other bills of entry without providing details or copies to the importer. The Tribunal found the Commissioner's valuation method flawed as it did not account for the actual value in 1984 and depreciation. Given the importer's declared value of Rs. 19,12,400, the Tribunal held that duty should be levied based on the importer's value, concluding that the department can only tax the declared amount.

Confiscation of Goods under Customs Act:
The appellant imported the printing machine against Import Trade Control Restrictions, leading to the machine's confiscation by the Commissioner under Sections 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act. The appellant accepted the confiscation and redemption terms, conceding that the import violated restrictions. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation order with the option to redeem on payment of Rs. 1,50,000, as agreed by the appellant's counsel. Additionally, a penalty of Rs. 50,000 under Section 112(a) was imposed, which the Tribunal confirmed. Thus, the Tribunal upheld the confiscation and penalty as per the original order.

Imposition of Penalty under Section 112(a) of the Act:
The Commissioner imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000 on the importer under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act. The Tribunal confirmed this penalty along with the confiscation of the goods, as the appellant's counsel acknowledged the violation of import restrictions. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the penalty as per the Commissioner's order, emphasizing the importer's breach of trade control regulations.

In summary, the Tribunal's judgment addressed the valuation of the imported printing machine, the confiscation of goods under the Customs Act, and the imposition of a penalty under Section 112(a). The Tribunal corrected the valuation method, ruling that duty should be based on the importer's declared value. It upheld the confiscation and penalty due to the violation of import restrictions, as acknowledged by the appellant's counsel. The judgment provided clarity on the issues raised and affirmed the Commissioner's decision with modifications to ensure fair treatment of the importer.