9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of foreign Chartered Engineer Certificate. In the end, the original authority has worked out the assessable value on the basis of manufacturer's value suggested by local Chartered Engineer, applied principles of depreciation as laid down by CBEC and arrived at the derived total value of ₹ 50,54,047/- as representing the assessable value for these goods. The quantum of redemption fine imposed on BBL and the penalties imposed on BBL and on Shri Lakhbir Mutchall are commensurate with their acts and omissions. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - C/267-268/2007-DB - A/30551-30552/2017 - Dated:- 12-4-2017 - Mr. (Dr.) Satitsh Chandra, President And Mr. Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Technical Member Shri G. Sudhakar, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Machine is about 24 years old and is of Austrian origin. While nothing the condition of the machine, they have recommended its FOB value as Euros 6000 as against Euros 4000 declared in the B/E No.s1411 dt. 28/04/2005. b. The chocolate depositing plant and lentil plant are about 24 years old and are of German origin. While noting the condition of the machines they have recorded their FOB value as US$ 31800 as against the FOB value of US$ 12699 declared in the B/E Nos.1412 dt. 28/04/2005. 3. As the Inspection Report confirmed the under valuation, the above said Cone Machine valued at ₹ 7 lakhs (market value) and Chocolate Depositing Plant and Lentil Plant valued at ₹ 30 lakhs (market value) were seized under a panchanama ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rated the grounds of appeal and also submitted written submissions, which can be summarised as follows: i. The adjudicating authority re-determined the values in terms of Rule 10A of customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988. However, he did not follow the procedure stipulated in the said Rule. ii. The adjudicating authority should have accepted the transaction value in terms of Rule 4 ibid in the absence of circumstances particularised under Rule 4(2) ibid. iii. The adjudicating authority holds that he has a reasonable doubt consequent on an investigation conducted by the department. The fact however remains that the said investigation was conducted in respect of Bill of Entry No.1443 30/04/2005 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er are proof of this and we reproduce the same below :- 11. Keeping this point aside for the moment, it is probably relevant to examine whether the investigations done in the current case are in conformity with the proposition canvassed by the Learned Advocate. As laid down by the Section 14(1A), the price of the imported goods shall be determined accordance with Rules made in this behalf. Rule 3 of the Valuation Rules provide under Clause (i) that subject to the Rules 9 and 10A of the Rules, the value of the imported goods shall be the transaction value. Rule 10A provides that when the proper officer has reason to doubt the truth or accuracy of the value declared, he may ask the Importer to furnish documents information, etc. After rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ations that the intelligence received regarding undervaluation is confirmed. The investigations also included recording of statements, etc. Thus, the entire exercise was in conformity with the principles laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court. After these investigations, the Importers had accepted the undervaluation and paid the duties to the extent of ₹ 14,19,705/-. It is pertinent to note that these statements are not retracted even today. 8. It is also not known why the appellant is continuing to harp on the allegation that Department investigation was conducted in respect of the Bill of Entry No.1443 dt. 30/04/2005 which is not relevant to the present import. It is noted that the appellants had raised this point even during th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rer. 10. In the event, we are of the considered opinion that there were no procedural irregularities in arriving at the assessable value of the impugned goods. The authority, in the impugned order, has gone into all aspects of the case and has arrived at well reasoned findings. It is pertinent to note that on the one hand, the appellants have preferred to import machineries of around 20 years old with very little life remaining working life, which fact they have not declared in any of the Bills of Entry filed by them. They have grossly undervalued the assessable values of the imported items in the Bills of Entry. In any case when the load port Chartered Engineer Certificate is not satisfactory, Customs authorities are well within their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
