2018 (3) TMI 127 - AT - Customs

Mis-declaration of value and description of imported goods - M.S. Turning Boring - Held that - the impugned goods had been mis-declared by the appellant, which was detected at the time of examination of goods. The report of Chartered Engineer and the United Solutions Laboratory has brought out the percentage of both categories of goods namely the turning and boring scrap and the iron powder - the adjudicating authority is required to re-determine the value of iron dust powder in the consignment under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 and re- adjudicate the matter afresh after assessing the iron powder at its re-determined value - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Mis-declaration of goods, incorrect assessment of value for iron powder, appeal against impugned order.

Analysis:
1. The appellant imported goods declaring a transaction value for clearance under a specific tariff item. The examination revealed a mix of MS Turning Scrap and mill scale in the consignment. Lab reports showed varying iron content in the samples, leading to inconclusive results. Further testing was recommended by the Chartered Engineer to determine the composition accurately.

2. The adjudicating authority classified the iron dust powder under a different Customs Tariff Heading, rejected the declared value, and enhanced the duty to USD 400 MT. The goods were confiscated with an option for redemption on payment of fines. The Commissioner upheld this decision, prompting the appellant to file an appeal challenging the valuation of the iron powder.

3. The appellant argued that the value of iron powder was not correctly assessed, as the price of iron dust powder is lower than that of MS Turning and Boring scrap. The appellant did not dispute the mis-declaration but contended that the value of the iron powder should be determined separately.

4. The department contended that the value of USD 400 MT for iron dust powder was appropriate based on the Chartered Engineer's report and the appellant's no objection to paying duty on the iron dust over the invoice value. The department supported the impugned order as correctly reflecting the situation.

5. Upon hearing both parties and reviewing the records, the Tribunal acknowledged the mis-declaration of goods. However, it noted the distinct nature of the two categories of goods and the incorrect adoption of the same value for both. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to re-determine the value of iron dust powder under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, and re-adjudicate the matter accordingly.

6. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the case back to the adjudicating authority for a fresh assessment of the iron powder's value in the consignment, emphasizing the need for a separate valuation for the iron powder. The decision aimed to ensure a fair and accurate assessment of the goods, rectifying the valuation discrepancy identified in the initial adjudication.