9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Customs duty evasion through misdeclaration of goods' description and value. 2. Allegation of misdeclaration of particulars by the Customs authorities. 3. Legality of the proceedings and disclosure of import details. 4. Justification of the actions of the lower authorities. Analysis: 1. The dispute in this case revolved around the confiscation of Floppy Diskettes imported by the appellants in June 1995 due to alleged misdeclaration of description and value, leading to customs duty evasion. The Commissioner upheld the order-in-original against the appellants, enhancing the declared value by 73% based on imports of identical goods at Mumbai. 2. The appellants contended that the goods had been properly assessed by the Customs before clearance, with the value already enhanced based on a special investigation branch enquiry. They argued that the authority cannot later claim misdeclaration without considering these aspects, especially since the descriptions provided were essentially the same, with abbreviations indicating the same properties of the goods. 3. During the proceedings, the appellants raised concerns about the legality of the actions taken by the Customs authorities, highlighting that the order was based on imports at Bombay without providing details or copies of those import documents. They emphasized the unjustified delays caused by the authorities, rendering the goods obsolete for current computer models. 4. Upon review of the records and submissions, the Tribunal found the actions of the lower authorities unjustified. The original assessment had already factored in an enhanced value without proper consideration, and the lack of specific details regarding the alleged imports at Bombay undermined the validity of the decision. As a result, the impugned order was deemed unsustainable, set aside, and the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellants, granting them consequential relief.
|
