OMEX INTERNATIONAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS
LAWS(CE)-2015-2-19
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on February 18,2015

Omex International Appellant
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

SRI VENKATESH ENTERPRISES VS. CC TIRUCHIRAPALLI [REFERRED TO]
CASE OF CC,COCHIN VS. OFFICE DEVICES [REFERRED TO]
CCE (PREVENTIVE),AMRITSAR VS. BHAWANA SPINNING MILLS [REFERRED TO]
DIGITECH PHOTOCOPIER VS. CC MUMBAI [REFERRED TO]
MADHU INDUSTRIES LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, AHMEDABAD [REFERRED TO]
NEW COPIER SYNDICATE VS. COMMR. OF CUS., C. EX. & S.T. (A), HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]
NAVPAD ENTERPRISES VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, COCHIN [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, COCHIN VS. DILIP GHELANI [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) - (1.)AS per facts on record, the appellant imported 105 pieces of assorted make old and used photocopier machines and filed a bill of entry dated 3.7.2008, claiming the classification of the same under Customs Tariff sub -heading 84433920 and declaring the value of the goods as Rs. 10,13,256/ -. They also produced a Chartered Engineer's certificate showing the value of the goods as Rs. 13,51,080/ -. However, the Revenue did not accept the declared value and found that contemporary clearances as per NIDB data would be showing the value of around Rs. 19,59,937/ -. Accordingly, the consignment was taken up for further inquiries.
(2.)THE imported goods were examined and it was found that same were 105 pieces of old and used photocopier machines and different models along with their parts kept in 60 boxes. During examination it was found that two machines having model number IR 6000 and IR 330 found in place of IR -600 and IR -300 respectively. Accordingly, Revenue entertained a view that appellant mis -declared the consignment as also the value of the same and further, as the appellant was not having any license to import the said goods, the same were put under seizure on 28.8.2008. It stand observed in the impugned order of the Commissioner that on verification of the prices from the market, it has come to the notice that models mentioned in the invoices were obsolete models and all these models were of 5 - 10 years old and the manufacturers have discontinued the manufacturing of the said models and hence, the prices were not available.
However, the Revenue still insisted on another Chartered Engineers certificate which was produced by the appellant showing the value of the goods as Rs. 16,18,920/ -. The said Chartered Engineer certificate issued by M/s. Rajesh Barman & Associates was also not accepted by the Revenue who procured another Chartered Engineers' certificate from Shri Pankaj Gupta wherein, he after examining the goods opined the value of the same as Rs. 20,13,120/ -.

(3.)THE statement of Shri S.C. Chawla, proprietor of importing firm was recorded wherein he said that he was importing the goods for the first time and the same were purchased from the traders on the agreed upon the value. However, he agreed to discharge the customs duty on the value as disclosed by the Chartered Engineer and requested for imposition of reasonable redemption fine and penalty.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.