9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 509X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2018 that price list mention the higher prices than declared by the importer we will like to mention that the price list of any product cannot be taken as the basis for determining the transaction value as has already been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Eicher Tractors Ltd. vs. CC, Mumbai [2000 (11) TMI 139 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. Provisional release of the goods should be allowed to the appellant on submission of a bond for an amount of ₹ 92,90,825/- backed by bank guarantee of ₹ 2 lakhs as per provisions of Section 110 (2) of Customs Act, 1962 - appeal allowed. - Customs Appeal No. 53466-53467 of 2018 - Final Order No. 50188-50189/2019 - Dated:- 6-2-2019 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) and Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 16 February 2018, ask the Department to pass an order under Section 110A of the Customs Act regarding provisional release of the seized goods within 10 days from the receipt of Hon ble High Court s order. In deference to Hon ble High Court s orders, the Department vide its order dated 23 February 2018 has allowed provisional release of the seized goods under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 to the appellants on the following conditions :- (a) Submission of Bond, for the provisional release of the goods, of amount ₹ 92,90,825/- (Rupees Ninety Two Lacs Ninety Thousand and Eight Twenty Five only) i.e. a bond value equivalent to the redetermined/estimated value of the seized goods. (b) Submission of Bank Guarantee of ₹ 8, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat RSP/MRP was not found affixed on these goods. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant have taken us through several bills of entries, wherein it is seen that the declared value of the imported consignment at the time of the import has been enhanced varying between 67% to 102% in various bill of entries. It has also been pointed out that the goods fall under the Retail Sale Price (RSP) category of goods and same has been indicated on the bills of entry. It has also been mentioned on the bill of entry that before the out of charge order has been given to the import consignment by the proper officer, the consignment has been examined by the proper officer. A glance at the import documents namely bills of entry prove it cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has already been held by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Eicher Tractors Ltd. vs. CC, Mumbai 2000 (122) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) . The relevant extract of the apex court decision is reproduced here below :- 22. In the case before us, it is not alleged that the appellant has mis-declared the price actually paid. Nor was there is mis-description of the goods imported as was the case in Pedia Sales Corporation. It is also not the respondent s case that the particular import fell within any of the situations enumerated in Rule 4 (2). No reason has been given by the Assistant Collector for rejecting the transaction value under Rule 4 (1) except the price list of vendor. In doing so, the Assistant Collector not only ignored Rule 4 (2) but al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... release imposed by the proper officer for release of goods seized/detained in the given facts and circumstances, appear to be harsh and inappropriate and, therefore, we order the provisional release of the detained/seized goods on following conditions :- (a) Provisional release of the goods should be allowed to the appellant on submission of a bond for an amount of ₹ 92,90,825/- backed by bank guarantee of ₹ 2 lakhs as per provisions of Section 110 (2) of Customs Act, 1962. (b) That the seized goods should be released to the appellant on meeting the requirements as mentioned at (a) above forthwith. 6. The appeal is accordingly allowed. Matter be listed for submitting compliance from the Department of the above order on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
