9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut genuineness of declared price – Further, The appellants had declared the assessable value for the import of the subject consignment adopting net book value which was zero in respect of most items - It is nobody’s case that the appellants had worked out the net book value at the time of filing declaration as per the records manipulated for the purpose and that the said records had not been maintained in the regular course of their day to day business. The appellants declared the price for the purpose of assessment in terms of its understanding of Section 14 of the Act. It cannot be held that the appellants had misdeclared the value for assessment intentionally to evade payment of duty - The importer cannot be held to have mis-declared the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11,476/- from SASL and imposed a penalty of Rs. one lakh on them under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 (the Act). An appeal filed by the assessee was disposed by the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 623/2001, dated 1-5-2001. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner had modified the Order-in-Original dated 8-11-2000 by a corrigendum dated 19-1-2001 enhancing the demand from Rs. 9,11,476/- to Rs. 9,71,128/- without affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee seeking modification of the demand contained in the Order-in-Original dated 8-11-2000. The Commissioner had enhanced the demand violating principles of natural justice. The Commissioner had not given detailed findings on the charge of suppression in the matter. The Tribunal r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the value declared was only for customs purposes. The goods were subject to re-export and that the transaction did not involve outflow of foreign currency. SASL prepared inventory of the equipments owned by it at various locations and prepared a monthly report showing the Gross Book Value and the respective net book value of all such assets called the Fixed Asset Report. The Commissioner had adopted the Fixed Asset Report (FAR) for the month of December 1995 to collect the Gross Book Value in respect of each of the items imported and applied depreciation as per Ministry's letter F. No. 493/124/86-Cus., dated 19-12-1987 to arrive at the assessable value. However, in some cases he took the Gross Book Value shown in the Fixed Asset Report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ower price. There was an excess demand of Rs. 3,11,260/- owing to the Commissioner adopting higher values of FAR 1995 and FAR 1999. The demand in excess of Rs. 6,59,868/- was not justified. 3. The goods had been examined by the customs before they were cleared; that the transaction did not involve sale and that the price declared was for customs purposes were declared in the invoice itself. It was open to the Department to verify the price declared and if the same was not acceptable for assessment. There was no misdeclaration or suppression as found by the Commissioner. The demand of duty and penalty were liable to be set aside. The appellants pray that the impugned order may be vacated. 4. We have heard both sides. We have carefully co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e existing orders relating to valuation of second-hand machinery. While they declared Rs. 50,01,545/- as the assessable value on the basis of their own scales of depreciation, the correct value should have been Rs. 79,34,958/-. It is also worth noting that out of the 32 items figuring in the Bill of Entry, for 18 items they presumed that the value is 'zero' on the basis of rates of depreciation which they were adopting. It is a well-known fact that under the Customs law, no imported goods are treated as having 'zero' value. Every imported article is subjected to import duty and every item is expected to have some value. In case the importer is not able to declare the correct value, there is a provision under the Customs law under which the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... value of the goods at the time of the import as per their records. It is nobody's case that the appellants had worked out the net book value at the time of filing declaration as per the records manipulated for the purpose and that the said records had not been maintained in the regular course of their day to day business. The appellants declared the price for the purpose of assessment in terms of its understanding of Section 14 of the Act. It cannot be held that the appellants had misdeclared the value for assessment intentionally to evade payment of duty. The goods imported were several years old, most of them about ten years after their respective date of procurement. The authorities had examined the goods and cleared them. It cannot be h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
