9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and declared a value of approximately Rs. 12 lakhs. The said transaction value was rejected by the lower authorities and redetermination of assessable value was interms of the provisions of Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The Adjudicating Authority in the case in hand concluded that the quantity in description of the goods is based on the invoice wherein the quantity did not tally with the actual description of the goods in respect of the Intel core duo processors hence rejected the same as also on the finding that the invoices issued by the person other than manufacturer. After rejecting the transaction value the Adjudicating Authority re-determined the value as per the provisions and arrived at the value based upon similar goods imported, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s as below: "(1) (a) subject to the provisions of Rule 3 of these Rules, the value of imported goods shall be the transaction of identical goods sold for export to India and imported at or about the same time as the goods being valued" Therefore the values of identical goods imported at the nearest to the time of import of the impugned goods was taken on the NIDB data available and the values adoptable are found to be as follows: Sl. No. Description of computer mother boards Quty. In Nos. Value as declared by Importer Rs. Value in respect of the quantity Rs. Value of identical goods as per NIDB Rs. Value in respect of the qty. as per Rule 5 of CVR 1988 Rs. 1. Intel Mother boards Model BOXDG33BUC 760 1032.50 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the duty liability. 8. Since we have come to a conclusion that there is misdeclaration of value; the confiscation of goods ordered is also upheld, and redemption fine in lien of confiscation seems to be in consonance with the numerous decisions of the Tribunal, accordingly, the confiscation is upheld, as also the redemption fine imposed. 9. As regards penalty we find that the penalty has been imposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 is of Rs. 28,10,331/-, which in our view seems to be dis-proportionate, considering the facts and circumstances in the case in hand. In similar set of facts when there was mis-declaration of the value and the value stands enhanced, Tribunal has been taking a view that penalty imposed should be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
