9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (10) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and segregated. The contents found were noticed to be 111 nos. incomplete engine blocks, 50% of which could be reused after reconditioning, 51 nos. were found to be used diesel engines, and some very old Bonnet Coverings were found in the consignment, which were treated as scrap. The engine blocks in reusable conditions were assessed to a value of 10,000 each and a scrap of Rs. 10/- per kg. The Commissioner (Appeals) after considering the appellant's request to fix the value of the scrap at par with the contemporaneous import of scrap and the value of the engine blocks should be fixed legalistically, and came to a conclusion that the value of contemporaneous imports of comparable goods to be ranging from Rs. 7,000 to Rs. 18,000 and valuati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he provisions of Section 14 (1). The provision of Section 14(1) are totally applicable in this case i.e. the price is the sole consideration, the value is the price at the time of place of importation and the buyer and seller have no interest in the business of each other. (b) No reasons have been assigned for not accepting the invoice value as transaction value as contemplated under Rule 3 of CVR. (c) No comparison, as attempted by the original authority and appellate authority is possible as comparison is relevant only in the case of identical or similar goods. Here, the goods compared are certainly not identical or similar. The basis adopted both at the original and appellate stages is not correct. (d) No doubt at the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out etc. (h) As per the findings of the department the goods imported are not engines, but only certain parts assembly which could, in part be reused after repairs etc. When the basic characteristics of the engine are not there, even to call them incomplete engines would be wrong. These are at best parts assembly which are permissible for imports. The provisions under Section 111(d) would accordingly be applicable. (i) The following decisions are cited to in support of the above : (1) 1993 (113) E.L.T. 487 (Tribunal) Hind Printing Works v. Commissioner of Customs. Second Hand Machine: Machine imported cannot be compared in terms of extent of use and condition. (2) 1999 (109) E.L.T. 401 (Tribunal) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed and the value declared was only Rs. 1,26,645/-. 4. We have considered the submissions made by both sides and the material on record. We find :- (a) From the paper book that a submission is made that while fixing the quantum of fine and penalty no effort was seen to have been made to find out the margin of profit for goods as well as no effort was seen to have been made to find out the number of parts that could profitably be retrieved from them and therefore the fine and penalty as imposed be set aside besides the value of the engines should be redetermind. We also find, that the appellant in the paper book has submitted that "the missing items viz. cylinder heads, filter pumps, injector, filter dynamo and self-starter are not in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of such goods sold or offered for sale for delivery at the relevant time. Whether there is an international trade in relation to a particular kind of goods and whether any such price contemplated in Section 14(1) can be found is a question of fact. And in the present case, we find that the Commissioner has found that there were imports of similar nature of diesel engines (old and used), at almost the same level and time of imports. He however did not determine the imports of any such mixed lots of consignment as in this case. Nor did the importer provide any such evidence. (e) Relying upon the catena of decisions on acceptance/rejection of invoice value of this Tribunal, in particular the decision in the case of Mirah Decor, 1993 (68 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellants here relied upon, as regards valuation, had reduced the redemption fine to level of 100% of assessable value from the levels imposed by the Commissioner. The Tribunal did not consider any reduction in the penalty imposed [refer Shree Ram Enterprises, 1998 (103) E.L.T. 184 (Tribunal)]. When we find that fine in this case of an import in the BE dated 24-12-1996, to be at 98% of assessable value, keeping in mind the adequacy of fine as determined by WRB in case of Shree Ram Enterprises, we do not find a case or cause to remit the case back for de novo determination of the fine. We also find that there is no cause for us to interfere with the fine as determined by the Commissioner (Appeals). (i) We find that a penalty of Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
