2007 (4) TMI 477

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... R, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Original No. 41/05 dated 1-8-05 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Cochin. 2. The appellant imported certain equipments for setting up diagnostic center. Revenue proceeded against the appellants for non-declaration of certain items and mis-declaration of their value. Many un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pellant of the violation committed under the Customs Act. The finding that the goods are liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) is legal and proper. To that extent we uphold the Order-in-Original regarding confiscation. The adjudicating authority has imposed a fine of Rs. 6 lakhs in lieu of confiscation. Considering the huge list of undeclared items, we do not find that the fine imposed is e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Customs (Valuation) Rules. Moreover, the appellants have challenged the valuation done by Shri Dineshan, Manager Bio-medical Engineering, Amrutha Institute of Medical Sciences for the reason that he is not an expert in the field and also belongs to a rival organization. As no adequate grounds exist for rejecting the transaction, we allow the appeal of the appellant only in respect of valuation. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X