9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (1) TMI 210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s given an option to redeem goods on payment of a fine of Rs. 1,50,000/- within three months. A personal penalty of Rs. 75,000/- was also imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. The appellants imported 2,000 pieces of 250 watts high Pressure Sodium Vapour Lamps from Hong Kong. They filed the Bill of Entry No. 683 dated 29-7-1983. They declared the value of the imported goods at Rs. 1,82,741-12. The appellants sought clearance of the goods under OGL in terms of Appendix-10 of AM - 84 Policy Book. Part III of List-8 reads : All other items permitted under OGL in terms of the Import Policy in force, other than those covered by Appendices I and II above. Any item which is not covered by a specific or general description i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s. Iwasaki Electric Co. Ltd., Japan, works out to Rs. 158/-. Therefore under-valuation of the imported goods by Rs. 1,33,250/- was also alleged 3. The appellants sent a reply stating that the lamps in question have been imported to be used as components for street lighting system. In regard to the value they stated that the price list of M/s. Iwasaki Electric Co. Ltd., was not proved. The Collector of Customs, Cochin, after enquiry passed orders as set out above. 4. Mr. S.D. Nankani, Advocate, appeared for the appellants, while Mr. A.K. Jain, SDR, represented the Department. 5. Mr. Nankani argued that goods that are consumed should be interpreted as goods which could directly satisfy human needs without further processing. Accordi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e allowing import of similar goods was approved. In a ruling reported in order-in-appeal No.338 of 81 the West Region Bench in the matter of (Wintercraft Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay) held that it was fair and just that the same treatment should be given to the importers in the light of the past clearances made by them. 6. On the question of valuation, Mr. Nankani argued that the department has not furnished adequate particulars about the price list relied on by them. The burden is on the department to prove that there was underinvoicing. He sought support by relying on the decision of the Tribunal in Western Electronics v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay (Order No.165 166/84-A dated 1-3-1984 in Appeal Nos. l999/83-A and 23 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n occasions when no licence was required. 8. In regard to the valuation, Mr. A.K. Jain pointed out that the appellant has not rebutted the pleaput forward by the Department. The respondent has produced the price list based on the manufacturer s catalogue and the value mentioned therein should be accepted. 9. The two questions that arise in this appeal are : (i) whether Sodium Vapour lamps imported by the appellants could be considered as component parts as contended by them; and (ii) whether the valuation given by the respondent should be accepted. 10. It is not disputed that the appellants have imported 2,000 pieces of high pressure Sodium Vapour lamps. They have imported the goods under the provision of List No. 8, Part No.II ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ulb is part of a lighting system - domestic or otherwise. But it does not become a component of any manufactured product and remains a consumer item. Hence Sodium Vapour bulbs cannot be considered as components. 11. Let us now see whether Sodium Vapour lamps imported could be considered as consumer goods. Shri Nankani argued that goods that are consumed or where the utility is destroyed alone could be treated as consumer goods. But the definition of consumer goods in Para 513 of the Import Policy for AM-84 defines consumer goods as consumption goods which can directly satisfy human needs without further processing. In this case, the Sodium Vapour lamp satisfies the human needs of electrification without any further processing to the bulb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Entry contained declarations to that effect the appellants cannot rely on those documents. 13. Thus on a careful consideration of the materials placed we are of the view that the lower authorities have correctly held that the imported lamps in question cannot be treated as components for street lighting system. We do not also accept that the bulbs being not capable of domestic use would make any difference in regard to the issue. 14. We next considered the question of valuation. The appellant declared the price at Rs.90/- per piece. The value according to the price list relied upon by the department works out to Rs.158/- per piece. In the show cause notice the department has only stated that Rs.158/- appears to be the fair price ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
