Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (8) TMI 1355

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ping charges. It is also a mater of record that instead of mutilated articles what were found was old and worn cloths whose import was prohibited - the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant are false and can be verified from the statements of Ajay Garg and from the orders of the lower authorities. Rejection of transaction value - HELD THAT:- When the appellant himself has produced true invoices showing the correct transaction value and also tendered his statement to this effect, the proper course for the officer is to re-assess the Bills of Entry as per the correct transaction value declared by the appellant - If the officer had rejected the declared assessable value of 0.95 US dollars per kg submitted by the appellant a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .05.2020 to clear imported goods declared as old original completely pre-mutilated and fumigated hosiery synthetic woollen rags and on examination by the officers of Commissioner (Preventive), the imported goods were found to be non-mutilated, old and used woollen clothing such as shirts, trousers, skirts, jackets etc. Import of these goods is restricted as per the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20. The goods were examined under panchnama and seized and the statement of Ajay Garg, Proprietor of the appellant was recorded on 10.06.2020 under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 [Act]. He agreed that the goods were not mutilated and were old and used worn clothing. It was also found during examination that the quantity of the goods was more than d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd Rule 11 of the Foreign Trade (Regulations) Rules, 1995. He allowed the goods to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 60,000/- for each Bill of Entry and imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- under section 112 (a) (i) in respect of each bill of entry the penalty of Rs. 6,00,000/- under section 114AA in respect of Bill of Entry dated 29.05.2020 and a penalty of Rs. 7,00,000/- in respect of Bill of Entry dated 23.05.2020. 7. He also re-determined the customs duty and ordered it to be paid along with applicable interest. Towards the end, the Additional Commissioner also advised the appellant to not import such goods in future without the requisite licence. 8. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the above order. 9. Learned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... what was declared. When questioned, Ajay Garg said that he had declared less quantity so as to save shipping charges. It is also a mater of record that instead of mutilated articles what were found was old and worn cloths whose import was prohibited. When asked about this import Ajay Garg clarified that he had learnt that there was a good market for such old clothes and, therefore, he had imported them and intended to sell them as such in Delhi Market. He also said that declaring them as mutilated goods in the Bill of Entry was on account of a mistake by his employee. Therefore, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant are false and can be verified from the statements of Ajay Garg and from the orders of the lower autho .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng the correct transaction value and also tendered his statement to this effect, the proper course for the officer is to re-assess the Bills of Entry as per the correct transaction value declared by the appellant. 15. If the officer had rejected the declared assessable value of 0.95 US dollars per kg submitted by the appellant as the correct transaction value, then he would have had to go through the Valuation Rules 4 to 9. The officer simply accepted the assessable value declared by the appellant as correct assessable value. There is no infirmity in re-determining the assessable value and calculating the differential duty on the basis of declared true invoices . 16. Since the mis-declaration of the nature of the goods, quanitity and value .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates