9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 948X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the imported consignment. Based on the declaration in the bill of entry, the Customs Authorities at the port of import inspected the goods and found that part of the goods imported are H beam, having length of 12' to 14' (secondary/defective). On the basis of such investigation, the value of USD 392 PMT declared by the appellant in the bill of entry was rejected and the value was determined at USD 450 PMT by referring to Rule 5 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. Both the classification and valuation aspect with regard to the subject import were adjudicated vide order dated 15.03.2013 and the differential amount of duty was confirmed as payable by the appellant. Besides, redemption fine and personal penalty have also been impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Department at the port of import, the description cannot be changed and duty liability cannot be fastened against the appellant. To support his above stand, the Ld. Advocate has relied on the following decisions of the Tribunal. - HR Enterprises vs CC (ICD) New Delhi reported in 2012 (284) ELT 83 (Tri. Del) - CC Jodhpur vs Sunshine Artifacts reported in 2012 (280) ELT 156 (Tri. Del) - Bengal Export Corpn vs CC (Port) Kolkata reported in 2012 (278) ELT 332 (Tri. Kolkata) - Shiva Ispat Udyog vs CC (Port) Kolkata reported in 2010 (254) ELT 297 (Tri. Kolkata) - MTC Busines (P) Ltd. vs Commr of Cus (Import), Nhava Sheva reported in 2012 (275) ELT 462 (Tri. Mum) - Global Shiptrade (P) Ltd. vs Commr of Customs, Kandla reporte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant has waived issuance of SCN and deposited the assessed duty liability without any protest, it has to be construed that the change in the classification of the goods has been accepted by the appellant and in such circumstances, imposition of redemption fine and penalty is justified. 4. Heard the Ld. Counsel for both the sides and perused the records. 5. The fact is not under dispute that the appellant had imported rerollable steel scrap. The said fact is evident from the import documents such as the invoice issued by the overseas supplier, the packing list, bill of lading, certificate of origin etc. Upon examination of the goods at the port of export, M/s World Wide Inspection Service (P) Ltd. have also certified that the description of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e goods are similar, it is required to ascertain that the country of origin is same in case of comparable goods with the goods relevant for assessment. In the case in hand, the country of origin was "Sharjah- UAE", whereas in the bill of entry dated 7.2.2013 referred to in the adjudication order, the originating country was different. Thus, the goods cannot be considered as similar. Further payment of duty by the appellant at the enhanced rate without contesting the enhanced duty liability, was due to avoidance of demurrage and detention charges of the vessel. Such payment cannot prove under-valuation of goods for the purpose of imposition of redemption fine and penalty, especially in view of the fact that the onus vest with the customs dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
