9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 584X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowed partially. - C/649/2007 - C/518/2011(PB) - Dated:- 14-12-2011 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Shri Mathew John, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Saurabh Yadav, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri K.K. Jaiswal, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Mathew John, Member (T)]. The appellants filed Bill of Entry No. 1625 dated 26-12-2006 at ICD, Gurgoan for import of 48 Numbers of old and used parts of photocopiers like copier assemblies, functional gears, feeding rod, fixing rollers, clutches, ADF, sorters and trolley, etc of models Canon NP 1318, Canon GP 215 and Canon GP 210 (total 49 Nos.) and Canon X-820 (2 Nos.). They had declared import price of Rs. 150 per set. 2. Since the goods appeared old and used and the value declared ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s should be valued as per the value assessed by the Chartered Engineer. He assessed the value of goods at Rs. 5,63,482/-, confiscated the goods under Section 111(d) and imposed a redemption fine of Rs. 2,50,000/-. Further he imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the appellant under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act. 6. Aggrieved by the adjudication order the importer filed an appeal with the Commissioner (Appeal) challenging the classification adopted by Revenue as well as the value adopted. The Commissioner (Appeal) held that the goods will be classifiable under Tariff Item 90099900. He also held that the Chartered Engineer did not give any basis for the value adopted by him and therefore the order for enhancement of value was not maint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ports to demonstrate that complete photocopier was imported. He submits that if his profit margin was very low he would not have imported so many consignments of such items after repeated intervention by the department. He pleads that there is no case for showing any leniency to the importer who was a habitual offender. 9. We have considered arguments on both sides. 10. We have considered the argument of the Appellants that once the classification under Tariff item 90099900 as parts of capital goods, there was no prohibition on its import because the licensing policy against the tariff item indicates that all goods of this Tariff item are freely importable. This argument is applicable equally for the complete photocopiers falling under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
