9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g to the Rules of Interpretation, an article which is incomplete or unfinished and has the essential character of the complete or finished product has to be treated as finished product and classified accordingly. We cannot imagine a complete motor cycle without two wheels, fuel tank, etc. Therefore, even though both the appellants had admitted the classification of the item as a full motor cycle and the department has treated the same accordingly, we cannot uphold this view. appellants have apparently planned the import of these items through their friends in consultation with mechanic and deliberately declared only as ‘motor cycle engine’. Even assuming that it was a gift, even if we accept that engines were gift, we cannot imagine a si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Even though the appeals are filed by two different persons against two separate orders, the issue involved is same and, therefore, both the appeals are taken together and a common order is being passed. 2.1. Appeal No. C/562/2006 has been filed by Shri Mohammed Anees. In this case, the product imported by the appellant has been classified as Motor Cycle and the same was confiscated on the ground of mis-declaration and imposed redemption fine of Rs. 2,00,000/- and penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the importer. The importer (appellant) was also required to be executed a Bank Guarantee for Rs. 50,000/-. 2.2. The appeal No. C/563/2003 has been filed by Shri Mohammed Nayaz Ahmed and in this case also goods imported by the appellant has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ike and the importer was not aware of the law that import of motor bike was not permitted at Bangalore Airport and would attract higher rate of duty. Both the importers waived the requirement of show-cause notice. Consequently, the impugned orders were passed by lower authority after granting personal hearing against which appeals were filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the appellants appeals. Hence, both the appellants are before the Tribunal. 5.1. The first issue is whether the imported items would make a complete motor bike or not. Even though several decisions were cited to support the submissions that importation of parts would not amount to importation of the full item, in our opinion, the same would not require an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ift, even if we accept that engines were gift, we cannot imagine a situation where a friend would send motor cycle engine and various other parts without informing the friend as to what are the items he has sent. 5.3. Another aspect that has to be taken note is that similar items have been sent as a gift by two different persons from Singapore to two persons in India which would clearly go against the claim of the appellants that parts of the motor cycles were sent by them were gifts. Therefore, this is a case of mis-declaration and therefore, the confiscation of the goods is in order and the redemption fine was imposable. However, there is no finding to the contrary in respect of the claim made by the appellants that motor cycles were im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
