9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 476X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting the declared value of Rs. 5,08,602/- in Bill of Entry No. 303582, dated 28-11-2000 and declared value of Rs. 5,24,491/- in Bill of Entry No. 305485, dated 12-12-2000, ld. Adjudicating authority assessed value thereof at Rs. 10,20,672/- and Rs. 10,12,167/- respectively. Goods imported by those two Bill of Entries were also confiscated, allowing redemption thereof on payment of fine of Rs. Six ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wo importers, the authorities below determined assessable value of the import arbitrarily discarding the declared value. Goods imported by appellant was second quality with less clarity in the glass and packing was also in the plain brown and printed cartons. But compared imports were first quality packed in printed gift boxes. There were no warranting circumstances to equate both goods and enhanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er for which first appeal was dismissed. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. Investigation revealed that supplier's representative Shri Ravi Vaswani was in intimate connection with one Shri Ramesh Chander Arora, Proprietor of M/s. Alfa Exports & Imports of New Delhi, who disclosed to the appellant's representative that only 50% of the actual value is disclosed in the import ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereof. The table explains the quantum of under-valuation to the extent of 50%. When there was no distinction in the goods found, the authority rejected the plea of second quality with less clarity. Detailed description apparent from the adjudicating order in paras 9, 10 & 11 compelled to enhance the value to the extent adjudicated. Entire finding of the adjudicating authority was confirmed in page ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an Sasaki Glass Co. Ltd. The statement recorded under Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 remained undisturbed. In absence of contrary evidence led by appellant, there is no scope for interference to the findings and conclusions of the authorities below. 8. In view of the above reasoning the appeal is dismissed waiving redemption fine imposed in absence of goods being available physically for c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
