9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 1124 - AT - CustomsValuation of imported goods - old and used Digital Multi Function Printer - restricted goods or not - applicability of Circular No.27/2011-Customs dated 04.07.2011 - confiscation - redemption fine - penalty - HELD THAT - As the Bill of Lading is in this case is 06.02.2013, which was issued prior to 28.02.2013 and this Tribunal in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PORT) , KOLKATA VERSUS BHAWANI ENTERPRISES 2017 (11) TMI 974 - CESTAT KOLKATA , has observed We agree with Commissioner (Appeal) s findings that (i) mere enhancement of value on the basis of C.E. certificate cannot be a ground for treating declared value as mis-declared unless there is other corroborative evidence. (ii) except enhancement on the basis of C.E. s Certificate, there is no other material on record to inform that declared value was mis-declared. It is also held that the Bill of Lading is prior to 28.02.2013 for import of the identical goods as in the case of Bhawani Enterprises, wherein it has been held that there was no restriction on import of the subject goods, therefore, the appellant is not required to obtain any specific license for import of the impugned goods. The enhancement of value on the basis of Chartered Engineer s certificate cannot be a ground for treating declared value as mis-declared unless there is other corroborative evidence. As the issue is no more res integra, it is held that the value declared by the appellant is correct and no license is required by the appellant for import of the said goods. The impugned order is set aside - Appeal allowed.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the import of old and used Digital Multi Function Printer without obtaining permission from the Ministry of Environment & Forest, confiscation of goods, imposition of redemption fine and penalty, and the requirement of a specific license for import. Import of goods without permission: The appellant imported old and used Digital Multi Function Printer without obtaining permission from the Ministry of Environment & Forest as required by Circular No.27/2011-Customs. The goods were held liable for confiscation, and a redemption fine and penalty were imposed. The Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) dismissed the appeal, but the Tribunal held that as the Bill of Lading was issued prior to 28.02.2013, there was no restriction on the import of the goods. The Tribunal also noted that the value declared by the appellant was correct, and no license was required for the import of the goods based on the Chartered Engineer's certificate. Confiscation of goods and imposition of fine: The revenue contended that permission from the Ministry of Environment & Forest was required for the import of the goods, and as the appellant did not obtain the necessary permission, the goods were held liable for confiscation. The Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the confiscation and imposed a redemption fine and penalty. However, the Tribunal observed that the Bill of Lading was issued before the restriction date of 28.02.2013, as per the decision in the case of Bhawani Enterprises. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with consequential relief. Requirement of specific license for import: The issue of whether a specific license was required for the import of the goods was addressed by the Tribunal. It was held that as the Bill of Lading was issued prior to the restriction date, no specific license was needed for the import of the goods. The Tribunal emphasized that the value declared by the appellant was correct and that the Chartered Engineer's certificate supported the declared value, indicating no mis-declaration. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with any consequential relief.
|
