9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (12) TMI 455X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s required a import licence for their import. The appellants claim was that the machine was manufactured in 1991. The Commissioner s finding was that the machine had been manufactured in 1981. Consequent to the finding, the Commissioner confiscated the machine and imposed a redemption fine of Rs. 5.5 lakhs. A penalty of Rs. 1 lakh was also imposed. The present appeal challenges the confiscation of the machine. 2. The finding in the impugned order that the machine was manufactured in 1981 is based on two pieces of evidence. One was a plate affixed on the automatic exchange speed equipment machine. This is a part of the machine and the year of manufacture showed on it is 1981. The second piece of evidence was the electric circuit shown on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ine No. 76.46 warp knitting machine in the year 1991. The said machine was sold by us to the company Hoorens, Belgium. During the hearing of the case, the learned Counsel for the appellants emphasized that the certificate from the original manufacturer should be treated as conclusive. He pointed out that the machine itself bore the Sl. No. as 76046 and that was the same Sl. Number mentioned in the proforma invoice and the invoice covering the sale of the goods. With regard to the materials relied on in the impugned order, the learned Counsel submitted that the year of manufacture indicated on parts of machines should not be treated as determinative of the year of manufacture of machine itself. He has pointed out that over the years, mach ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Such a contradictory position is not sustainable. If the machine was of 1981, its price also would be so much less than the price of a 1991 machine. Therefore, if the year of manufacture was actually 1981, the appellant has been charged duty on a much higher value. The original manufacturer of the machine has certified that the machine was manufactured in 1991. The transaction between the importer and the foreign supplier was on the basis that the machine is of 1991 make. In determining the age of machine, the more relevant evidence is the evidence available on the machine as well as the evidence from the manufacturer. The year of manufacture on the parts cannot be the main evidence. The appellant s statement is not of much value in the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
