2018 (1) TMI 177 - AT - Customs

Redemption fine - penalty - import of old and used digital multifunctional printer - Held that - amendment made in the FTP on 28.2.2013 has mandated that these impugned items can only be imported after obtaining a license and in the present cases, the appellant had not obtained the license for importing the impugned goods - the Bill of Entry was filed on 15.11.2012 and 12.2.2013 which is prior to the amendment of FTP dated 28.2.2013. The import is after the amendment and therefore, the import is in violation of the Policy and therefore, there is no infirmity in the impugned order imposing redemption fine and penalty. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
- Valuation of imported goods rejected by Commissioner
- Direction to value goods based on Chartered Engineer certificate under Customs Valuation Rules
- Imposition of redemption fine and penalties

Analysis:

Valuation Dispute:
The appellants filed 11 appeals challenging the Commissioner's rejection of their valuation of imported goods, directing valuation based on a Chartered Engineer certificate under Customs Valuation Rules. The Commissioner also imposed redemption fines and penalties. Since the issue in all appeals was similar, the Tribunal decided to dispose of them collectively.

Facts of a Specific Appeal:
Taking the facts of appeal No. C/27606/2013 as an example, the appellant declared the value of old and used digital multifunctional printers for clearance. The Department doubted the declared value's genuineness due to missing details in the invoice. A Chartered Engineer valued the goods higher, alleging undervaluation and violation of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP).

Legal Arguments:
The appellant accepted the Chartered Engineer's valuation but contested the imposition of redemption fines and penalties. They argued that the imported goods fell under the category of second-hand capital goods, allowed under the FTP and supported by a Madurai High Court decision. However, the Department defended the impugned order, citing amendments in the FTP post-import and the requirement of a license for restricted goods.

Tribunal Decision:
After reviewing submissions and legal precedents, the Tribunal found that post-amendment in the FTP, a license was necessary for importing the goods in question. Only two appeals filed before the amendment date were exempt from this requirement. Relying on the Madras High Court's decision and Tribunal precedents, the Tribunal upheld the imposition of redemption fines and penalties in 9 out of 11 appeals. Only appeals by M/s. Atul Automation Pvt. Ltd. were allowed due to the pre-amendment filing dates.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed 9 appeals while allowing 2 appeals based on the pre-amendment filing dates, setting aside the impugned orders. The judgment was pronounced on 02.01.2018, concluding the disposition of all appeals.