9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 703X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri T.K. Kar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)]. The importers had placed an order with the firm in Hong Kong for import embroidery pieces. They declared the goods embroidery strips on visible ground and claimed classification under 5810.99 of the Customs Tariff. On examination the goods were found in certain cartons to be embroidery on visible base an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... difference in price of both qualities and the shipper had sent the mixed lot of both visible and invisible grounds and submitted fax copy letter to the effect of misshipment. (c) The lower authority charged the value at 3.5 US Dollars per K.G. and found the goods to be classifiable under 5810.90 for the embroidery in visible ground. The goods misdeclared valued at Rs. 6,27,937/- were confiscat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That price of 3.5 US Dollar was not contemporaneous and no details of such consignment have been discussed. (d) The goods were sent by the foreign supplier through oversight and the mistake in shipment has been admitted by the foreign supplier. The price of both the goods were the same, therefore the bona fides of the importers cannot be questioned and they are not liable for penalty and g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. The confiscation under Section 111(m) is called for. (b) We also find that as there is a misdeclaration of the description of the goods under import, therefore the declared transaction value cannot be accepted. The valuation had been done with reference to the valuation rules. We find no reasons advanced to differ with the valuation as arrived at. Since once transaction value is not acce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for confiscation under Section 111(m). Therefore the importers are liable for penalty under section 112 as arrived at by the lower authorities. The penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- imposed on the appellants is on the higher side. No fresh grounds have been brought before us to completely waive the fine and penalty. Considering that they were to get benefit of duty by this mis-declaration. We have reduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
