9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (12) TMI 264X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, technical drawings in one, and documents in the second. In both cases, the invoice was not enclosed Fair value was declared in one case and the goods were stated to have no commercial value in the other case. The Custom House called for invoices in each case. The invoice indicated the goods to be of part FEEP engineering documents for a plant to produce goods as per memorandum of understanding dated 16th February, 1994. Value of the first document was declared to be DM 807,000.00 plus document value of DM 1000.00 and know how fee DM 1,250,000 and document value nil in the second. Enquiries and investigation by the Custom House led it to conclude that the goods were technical drawings for the plant of the applicant to be put up in pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and machinery supplier and therefore its quantification will have to await finalisation of the project under which the machinery have been imported, and which was pending. The drawings by themselves have no intrinsic value and the information in them was necessary for utilisation of the plant. The Supreme Court in its decision in Collector of Customs (Prev.) Ahmedabad v. Essar Gujarat Ltd., 1996 (88) E.L.T. 609 (S.C.) had made the position clear. Therefore, there is no question of independent assessment to the duty of the drawings. Since the machinery had been cleared under Heading 98.01 as project import, these goods should also have been so assessed at the lower rate of duty of 25% applicable and not under Heading 49. Demand for duty wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s capacity as a Director of the firm he has acted and no notice issued to the company for the penalty imposed. He further points out that no penalty has been imposed on the CHA who sought to clear the second consignment in identical situation. 7. The Departmental Representative counters this by pointing out that Shriyan has deliberately misdeclared the goods by colluding with the importer s representative, as it was made it clear from the statement of Kishore Rathi and others. 8. From the Supreme Court s decision in Collector of Customs (Prev.), Ahmedabad v. Essar Gujarat Ltd. it will be seen that the value of the technical knowhow is to be included in the assessable value of the plant because the plant could not be rendered operational ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... declare the goods to be knowhow is also of significance although it has to be accepted that the invoices which were produced when the Customs demanded them did indicate this. As far as Shriyan is concerned we are not persuaded by the argument that he acted lawfully and according to the instructions of its client. The fact that he has in his statement said that he was advised to draw the split up value in order to avoid first check examination of the Customs shows his desire for speedy clearance which is not satisfactorily explained. However, the fact that the other CHA has been exonerated in what appear prima facie to be identical circumstances is in his favour, as also the fact that no notice was issued to the firm itself. Taking these as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
