Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2005 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (10) TMI 178 - CESTAT, CHENNAIDemand - Confiscation - fine and penalty - Valuation (Customs) - clearance of parts for Computer and data cartridges - HELD THAT:- The appellants are not able to give proper explanation for the existence of the parallel invoices. They only say that the parallel invoices indicate the list price and by negotiations they got the price reduced. They also urged the point that the foreign exchange remitted is only as per the declared value in the invoice submitted to the customers. In our view, the parallel invoices issued after the date of filing of the Bills of Entry cannot be related to the goods imported under those Bills of Entry. Hence, the prices found in the parallel invoices issued prior to the filing of the Bills of entry alone should be adopted for assessment purposes. Where the parallel invoices are issued later than the dates of filing of the Bills of Entry, the declared value can be accepted. In the light of the above observation, the original authority should re-compute the duty liability and the appellants shall pay the same. We cannot accept the contention of the appellants that no fine can be imposed in respect of goods which are already cleared. Once the goods are held liable for confiscation, fine can be imposed even if the goods are not available. We uphold the finding of the misdeclaration in respect of the parallel invoices issued prior to the date of filing of the Bills of Entry. Hence, there is misdeclaraiion and suppression of value and the offending goods are liable for confiscation u/s 111(m) of the Customs Act. Hence the imposition of fine even after the clearance of the goods is not against the law. Since the original authority has to re-compute the duty liability, the imposition of fine as well as penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act is kept open. In the light of the above observation we remand the matter to the original authority for de novo consideration in the light of the above observations. The orders should be issued within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.
|