9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the cost of the importer (appellant). The order for confiscation and re-export made in regard to 26 nos. of kids bikes does not require interference. From the records, it is seen that the goods were subjected to quality assurance test by National Accreditation Board for Testing Calibration Laboratory (NABL). This report is dated 30.05.2018. It can be presumed that before the original export to USA, the goods were subjected to test for quality and standards. It is affirmed by the department that the reimported 157 bikes belong to the lot that was originally exported. Therefore, it has to be construed that the appellant has complied with requirement of BIS standard (brand name) as well as identity of 157 nos. of bikes. The order of confi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide said Bill of Entry dated 11.06.2021 are reimport goods which were actually exported to US vide Shipping Bill dt. 27.05.2019. 2. The goods were subjected to examination and it was reported that imported kids bikes did not have model number marking. Out of 183 nos. of kids bikes, there were only 157 nos. of packing boxes with sticker containing model number. The remaining 26 nos. of kids bikes did not bear any model number or marking on the packing boxes. The department was of the view that identify of 26 kids bikes was not established. The officers also entertained the view that the goods have not complied with BIS standards. After adjudication, the original authority ordered for confiscation of the entire goods. However, an option ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... econd examination, the officers reported that out of 183 kids bikes only 157 kids bikes had the marking R01 on the cartons. On 09.08.2021, appellants filed representation to the officers of Customs informing that merely because the marking R01 is not found on the remaining packages (26 Nos.), it cannot be said that identify of the re-imported goods is not established. 4. Without considering the arguments of the appellant, the adjudicating authority passed the order by which he ordered confiscation of the entire goods with an option to redeem the goods for the purpose of re-export only. A redemption fine of Rs.1,00,000/- was imposed besides imposing penalty of Rs.50,000/-. 5. Learned Counsel argued that all the kids bikes belonged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on fine for re-export of the goods. He prayed that the confiscation may be set aside and the goods be allowed for home consumption and also grant waiver of demurrage charges. 7. Ld. A.R Shri S. Balakumar appeared and argued for the Department. He adverted to para-6 of the Order-in-Original which reads as under : 6. I find that, the Bill of Entry No.4281619 dated 11.06.2021 was 100% examined in the presence of the CHA, by the Shed Officers posted at M/s.Chandra CFS on 25.06.2021.A total of 5 (Five) package covering a total quantity of 183 Nos was examined by them. On Examination, it was inter-alia reported that (vi) Imported Bikes does not have any model no. marking (vii) Out of 183 no. bikes, 157 no. packing boxes have sticker ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ards) in sub para A, it is stated that goods should comply with BIS standards. 8. For re-import of goods, the identity of goods that they are goods which were originally exported has to be established. In the present case, there was no marking R01 on 26 packages and therefore their identity was not established. The order of confiscation and direction to re-import by paying redemption fine is legal and proper. He prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 9. Heard both sides. 10. From the narration of facts stated above, it can be seen that out of 183 kids bikes, the department does not deny the identity of 157 kids bikes. So also, there is no dispute as to the brand of these 157 bikes. The dispute is with regard to the 26 nos. of k ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at before the original export to USA, the goods were subjected to test for quality and standards. It is affirmed by the department that the reimported 157 bikes belong to the lot that was originally exported. Therefore, it has to be construed that the appellant has complied with requirement of BIS standard (brand name) as well as identity of 157 nos. of bikes. We hold that the order of confiscation and re-export in respect of 157 bikes requires to be set aside which we hereby do. 13. The impugned order is set aside and modified to the effect that the 157 nos. of kids bikes have to be released to the appellants for home consumption. Confiscation and order to re-export or for destruction of remaining 26 nos. of kids bikes is upheld.The red ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
