Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 583 - AT - CustomsDemand of duty on import of designs, drawings/technical specifications - liable to service tax or customs duty - Revenue claim that the drawings/designs, specifications imported have no intrinsic value and value declared by the appellant is grossly over-valued - As per the appellant, the said valuation of ₹ 300 crores was a part of the contract entered into by the appellant awarded under global tender documents. Revenue has no jurisdiction to examine such a contract and to pick up a small part of the contract reflecting the value of various services like drawing, designs and technical engineering services to be availed by them from M/s. CIPL. Held that: - the imported drawings and designs is exempted in terms of N/N. 12/2012 Cus dated 17.3.2012 and no Customs duty is required to be paid on the same even if the said import is treated to be import of goods. The Tribunal in the case of Sahil Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. vs. CC [2009 (8) TMI 496 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] has held that inasmuch as the import of rough diamond were exempted from payment of duty, no penalty can be imposed upon the importer in terms of the provisions of Section 112 of the Customs Act - Identical situation is available in the present case also when the import of design and drawings is exempted in terms of N/N. 12/12-Cus, dated 17.3.2012, the charge of over-valuation of the same cannot be sustained inasmuch no valuation is required to be arrived at by the Customs. We are of the view that in such circumstances neither the goods can be confiscated nor any penalty can be imposed upon the appellants. The receipt of drawing and designs by the appellant form M/s. CIPL was admittedly part of the rendered service on which the appellant has already discharged their Service tax liability under reverse charge basis. The said payment of Service Tax stand accepted by the Revenue. When the appellant brought the said fact to the notice of the adjudicating authority, he simply dismissed it without giving any concrete finding on the same. The appellant have already discharged the Service Tax on the said receipt of drawings, we are of the view that there was no further requirement to file further Bill of Entry with the declared value. It may also be noted that while charging the service tax, the Revenue has nowhere disputed the value of design and drawings and have accepted the same value as correct value of the services. In this scenario also, the Revenue stand adopted in the present proceedings cannot be adopted. There is virtually no evidence on record, to support the Revenue's finding that the drawing and designs are having no intrinsic value. Such finding of the adjudicating authority are based upon his own assumptive surmises and conjectures and not upon any legal and valid evidence on record. Confiscation and penalties set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|