9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 748X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e provisions of Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992, thus, rendering these imported Marble and Mosaic as restricted goods for import. Arguments of the Ld. Advocate that the policy condition imposed by the DGFT in exercise of powers under Section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992 is not legal or valid and the Notification has not specified that the import value if less than the MSP are to be regarded as restricted are not acceptable. The Original Adjudicating Authority in his Order-in-Original has observed that the importer has agreed for enhancement of the value in line with the Minimum Import Price as fixed in terms of DGFT Notification No. 38 (RE-2013) dated 26.08.2013. We are of the view that once the value of the imported goods have been enhanced on the basis of Minimum Import Price fixed in terms of DGFT s Notifications No. 65 (RE-2010)/2009-2014 New Delhi dated 04.08.2011 and No. 38 (RE-2013) dated 26.08.2013, we do not find any legal necessity to treat the imported goods having contravened the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992. As such, the confiscation and penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... price specified in the DGFT Notification for free importation was mistakenly adopted as contemporaneous price of subject imports to determine the enhanced value for assessment in terms of CVR and quantification of duty payable without passing any order on the same which required vacation of the findings. iii. It was submitted that the objective of discouraging import of inferior quality of goods by pushing up the value to the prescribed floor price which was 6-7 times more than the declared value without adducing proper reasoning and therefore not legally sustainable. iv. It was contended that the conclusion drawn by the impugned order on the question of waiver is biased and erroneous as the payment of redemption fine and penalty by the Appellant was construed as evidence towards undervaluation by the Appellant. v. It was submitted that the impugned order imposed excessive redemption fine by ignoring the Circulars of CBEC and various judgements of Hon ble Courts and Tribunals which advocated imposition of fine only to the extent of setting off the margin of profit. vi. It was contended that the impugned order is erroneous as it ignored the circumstances warranting imposition of pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arble and Mosaic below statutorily fixed prices by DGFT in contravention of Import Policy rendering the imports liable for confiscation and imposition of redemption fine and penalties. She has further argued that the importer has voluntarily accepted the enhanced value without any protest, he is precluded from challenging the same relying on the judicial precedents in the cases of M/s. Namo Alloys P Ltd. [2023 (12) TMI 15-CESTAT-CHANDIGARH] and Sodagar Knitwear [2018 (8) TMI 1777-SC]. 5. We have heard the Ld. Counsel and the Ld. Authorised Representative and perused the grounds of appeal and the submissions made by both sides. 6. The issues which arise for consideration in this appeal pertain to: i. Whether the subject imports are to be treated as restricted goods under the Import Policy thus become liable for confiscation justifying imposition of redemption fine and penalties under the Customs Act, 1962? and, ii. Whether enhancement of the value of imported goods basing on the DGFT s Notification No. 38 (RE-2013) dated 26.08.2013 is legal or valid in accordance with the provisions of Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Customs Valuation Rules, 2007? 7. The facts in the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been reproduced below : - Notification No. 65 (RE-2010)/2009-2014 New Delhi dated 4th August, 2011 reads as under : - Subject : Import policy of Worked monumental or building stone (except slate) and articles thereof, other than goods of heading 6801; mosaic cubes and the like, of natural stone (including slate), whether or not on a backing; artificially coloured granules, chippings and powder, of natural stone (including slate) S.O.(E) In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 read with Para 2.1 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-2014, the Central Government hereby makes the following amendments in the Schedule 1 (Imports) of the ITC (HS) Classifications of Export and Import Items. 2. Existing policy conditions (prior to this amendment) as available at page 474-475, for the Exim Codes 6802 10 00, 6802 21 10, 6802 21 20, 6802 21 90, 6802 91 00 and 6802 92 00 of Chapter 68 of ITC(HS) Classifications of Export and Import Items are extracted below (earlier policy conditions) : Import permitted freely provided CIF value is US$ 50 above per square metre. 3. After amendment the entry would read as below (amended poli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve section, in our considered view, the DGFT is empowered to impose restriction for import. The fixing of MIP is not to enhance the value of the goods but only to impose of restriction, any type of restriction can be imposed by the DGFT by issuing the Notification, therefore, the DGFT is well within the power under Section 3 of FT (D R) Act, 1992 to impose any condition for import. As such, the arguments of the Ld. Advocate that the policy condition imposed by the DGFT in exercise of powers under Section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992 is not legal or valid and the Notification has not specified that the import value if less than the MSP are to be regarded as restricted are not acceptable. 11. The Original Adjudicating Authority in his Order-in-Original dated 17.03.2014 has observed that the importer has agreed for enhancement of the value in line with the Minimum Import Price as fixed in terms of DGFT Notification No. 38 (RE-2013) dated 26.08.2013. The Lower Appellate Authority also has observed on the issue of valuation of the goods as follows: - Secondly, regarding the valuation of the goods, it is seen from para 10 of the Order-in-Original that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
