9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (2) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich is reproduced below :- M/s. Gapps Industries, C-65/1, Mayapuri Industrial Area, New Delhi were importing consignments of Polyester Webbing and thread at Import Air Cargo New Delhi on a regular basis. The importers were producing Import Licences for the declared value for clearances of the item imported. From the records of Import, it is seen that the value of Polyester Webbing was being declared as US $ 2.25 per kg. (C I New Delhi). This value however was suspected to be low and therefore an investigation was being conducted in respect of valuation of this item by the Special Investigation Branch Unit of the Custom House. By going through the Bills of Entry and other documents filed, it was noticed that technical specifications of the item being imported was not being declared and therefore it was difficult to readily ascertain the price of the item and get any quotation from the overseas suppliers. Since the detailed investigations being conducted was a time consuming exercise and the consignments being imported were heavy in weight and therefore incurring heavy demurrage, the same were ordered to be released on provisional basis under bond with bank guarantee to be furni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ared that the value of polyester webbing being imported at this port was declared on a lower side. The value of US $ 2.25/kg. being quoted by the importers was only slightly more than the cost of raw material i.e. yarn. In view of this fact, the value as being declared by the importers was not acceptable for the purpose of assessment under Section 14(1) (a) of the Customs Act, 1962. To cross check the technical specifications mentioned above by the importers in their letter dated 11-5-1988, samples of the goods were drawn and sent to the laboratory for testing. In the test report dated 30.5.1988, obtained from the Central Revenue Control Lab., New Delhi, it was indicated that the webbing consisted of white narrow woven fabrics with a width of 1.4 cm (approx). It was made wholly of texturised synthetic man-made to filament yarn of polyester and the denierage of warp was 160 and Weft was 326 respectively. In the test report, it was also stated that since the item was in knitted form, it was difficult to determine the denierage precisely. The test report, however, more or less confirmed the technical specifications as given by the importers. On the basis of above facts, a Show Cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. Collector s order besides fixing the assessable value similarly at US $ 3 per kg. (FOB Taiwan) also confiscated the goods under Section 111(m) for misdeclaration fixing a redemption fine of Rs. 6000/- and imposed a nominal penalty of Rs. 500/- under Section 112A considering that the appellants were prepared to produce import licence for the enhanced value. 4. Shri Asthana, learned counsel for the appellants pleaded for the Misc. application to be allowed as it consists of certain documents already on record. Not objected to by the learned SDR and it is accordingly allowed. On the merits of the appeals Shri Asthana contended that the appellants imported the goods Polyester webbing regularly from their Taiwan manufacturer of the goods. 5. As regards the evidence relied upon by the Department, the learned counsel urged that the reliance placed by the Department on the telex message from M/s. Vee Pee International was misplaced according to the appellants because the appellants had ascertained through their Taiwan manufacturers that M/s. Vee Pee International were not in existence and that the name of this firm is also not found in the Members Book of Zippers Manufacturers Asso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng, rugged closely woven cotton material used for belts and straps of many types and pointed out that the goods to be in raw form should be neither bleached nor dyed. On test of the present goods they have been found to be bleached and this bleaching process should add to its value according to the learned JCDR. As regards the evidence relied upon by the Department, the quotation obtained by the department from Vee Pee International shows the price of bleached product is higher than the raw product. Further, the fact that M/s. Vee Pee International is not a member of the Zippers Manufacturers Association will be no ground to say that they do not exist as a firm. They were very much in existence on being contacted by the Department. Similarly, the report obtained by the appellant from M/s. Kuang Tai is also not reliable as they clearly indicate rare arrangement with their Indian Agents indicating over-valuation. Therefore, no credence can be given to such a document. Similarly, M/s. Grand Link Brothers Company reply to the Co. also indicate a deliberate profit margin for the agents which again should debar its consideration as reflecting with genuine evidence. The learned SDR urged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the end product as US $ 2.25 per kg. could not be accepted. Ultimately out of these quotations certain adjustments were made and US $ 3.00 per kg. had been determined. The appellants herein have assailed this determination by showing that M/s. Vee Pee International was a bogus entity. This is based on their information from their Taiwan suppliers. A copy of their telex to the Taiwan suppliers is on record. It is stated therein that Customs authorities have quoted price of sale of webbing US $ 3.11 on the basis of telex code from Mr. Prakash Vaswani, V.P. International Taipai telex No. 26950 VP. We feel that it is not the right source of to import zippers and has quoted a high price. Please check and inform parties credential and also whether he is member of your Association of Zippers Manufacturers". 9. A reply from Taiwan is as follows : We cannot find the Company and telex No. from Members Book of Zippers Manufacturers Association. I think this is a cheat and hope you ask him to mail you the samples as they have quoted. This would show that the appellants themselves have suggested that M/s. Vee Pee International is perhaps not the right source as they have quoted a high ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t valuation on the basis of quotations was permissible under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962. This was after considering the submissions made before the Supreme Court that no reliance can be placed on such quotation to discard the invoice value of the goods furnished by the appellant which was claimed to reflect the correct value and that the price quotation relied upon was not sufficient to discharge the onus cast on the department to prove the correct value. It is also seen that in determining the value on the basis of the quotations the lower authorities have made sufficient adjustments and had taken the lowest of the quotations ultimately fixing the assessable value at US $ 3 per kg. Such determination of assessable value cannot therefore be con sidered to be at variance with the provisions of Section 14(1)(b) of Customs Act, 1962 and the valuation rules thereunder. The orders of the lower authorities determining the value of US $ 3 per kg. for the goods imported is therefore upheld. As regards the additional duty on the polyester webbing it is seen that this is based on the department view that the goods are narrow woven fabric under Heading 5806. Reliance is also placed o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
