Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2005 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (5) TMI 157 - CESTAT, BANGALOREValuation (Customs) - Clearance of goods declared as computer software/electronic goods - Demand - Assessment - Whether the appellant paid money for two systems and declared the value of only one system - HELD THAT:- After going through those submissions and also the description of the items imported we are satisfied that the items imported cannot be called as telephony systems, classifiable under CTH 8517.00. The items imported are for the functioning of prepaid system and not for telephony. Even without prepaid system, RPG Cellular system was functioning. Hence, the classification declared originally by the appellants appears to be correct. As regards the question of import of two systems, in our view, this issue is not very relevant. The goods, which have been imported are in accordance with the quantities mentioned in the packing list. The DRI officer visited UK for investigation. That investigation has not revealed that, the appellants paid an amount in excess of what has been declared by them in the Bill of Entry. Hence there are no grounds to reject the transaction value. We are also not in full agreement with the findings of the adjudicating authority that the appellants imported two systems. There is no proof that they had remitted more money than what was declared in the Bill of Entry for assessment. Under these circumstances, the finding of the adjudicating authority that they had imported two systems is set aside. We are also of the view that there is absolutely no evidence to show that the price of software has been inflated and the hardware under-invoiced. The contention of the learned JCDR that the software in the CD had not been used by RPG is not a very strong point, since the software was already loaded in the equipment. Normally when we purchase computer systems the operating system is sometimes loaded in the system itself. Even then, the licenced software is supplied in a CD for a consideration. There is also no rule that software should cost less than that of Hardware. The cost of software depends on its complexity and utility. Suppose there is a crash in the system, then the licenced software in the form of CD would enable us to load the software again. We need not doubt that the appellants had paid for licenced software. The fact that software costs more than the Hardware does not surprise us. Thus, the Order-in-Original has absolutely has no merits. Therefore we allow the appeals with consequential relief.
|