|
Advanced Search Options
Customs - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 593 Records
-
1998 (12) TMI 546 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Jig Boring Machine - Functions of a jig boring machine include drilling and milling ... ... ... ... ..... lants emphasised that the imported machine is not a production machine at all. Its high precision making it necessary only for the tool room. We have also seen the certificate given by the Central Machine Tool Institute, Bangalore, wherein they recorded that ldquo we are convinced that the machine under reference is a special tool room coordinate jig boring machine. rdquo 4. emsp The Tribunal decision in Sukeshan Equipments P. Ltd. v. C.C. - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 621 cited by the departmental representative does not apply to the facts of this case. The Tribunal in that decision was concerned with a particular machine which it noted performed multiple functions. The President of the Tribunal, the third member to whom the issue was referred on disagreement between two members of the Bench found that the principal function of the machine was drilling. This reasoning would not apply to the machine now under consideration above. We find no reason to interfere. 5. emsp Appeal dismissed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 430 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation and penalty - Misdeclaration ... ... ... ... ..... hat the actual value of the imported goods was much more and that the value shown in the invoice was a reduced value for replacement warranty. He submitted that the lower authorities had acted strictly in accordance with law and, therefore, prayed that the impugned order may be upheld. 5. emsp Heard the submissions of both sides. We find that the appellants had prepared the Bill of Entry on the basis of invoices. We note that in the invoices the value given was the reduced value on account of the warranty allowed by the foreign supplier. We are of the view that it was a bona fide mistake and we note that the appellants came out truthfully as and when they were asked to produce the requisite documents. Looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, we confirm the demand of duties confiscation and imposition of penalty are set aside. The Appellants shall be entitled to consequential relief, if any, in accordance with law. 6. emsp The Appeal is disposed of in the terms.
-
1998 (12) TMI 381 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Rate of customs duty - Vessel meant for off-shore drilling - Customs exemption - Demand - Limitation - Penalty
-
1998 (12) TMI 379 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... e channel and spring played complementory role and it could not be said that as which of them gave the set its essential character. 29. emsp After going through the respective orders proposed by the ld. Member (J) and ld. Member (T), and in the light of the discussion above, I agree with the order proposed by the ld. Member (J) that the spring and channel sets for air compressors imported by the appellants were to be classified under sub-heading No. 8414.90 of the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. . Sd/- (Lajja Ram) Member (T) MAJORITY ORDER In the light of the majority opinion, we hold that the spring and channel set for air compressors imported by the appellants herein fall for classification under sub-heading 8414.90 of the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any, due to the appellants in accordance with law. emsp Sd/- (G.R. Sharma) Member (T) Sd/- (Jyoti Balasundaram) Member (J)
-
1998 (12) TMI 325 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... er on the night of 15th September, 1991. The order itself indicates that Damjibhai Patel of Rajkot claimed ownership of the jeep and in his statement has said that the appellant was the driver and that he (Patil) had sent him with the jeep to Porbandhar at 1 p.m. on 16th September, 1991 to pick up labourers required by him, he being a government contractor. He does not appear to have been asked, and in any case does not say anything about where the jeep was on the night of 15th September, 1991. 4. emsp There is thus absolutely no evidence to connect the jeep with any silver that might have been landed. The fact that the appellant did not reply to the notice or appear for the hearing may perhaps aiose some suspicion, although his failure to do so may be capable of alternative explanation. It is however entirely insufficient to impose a penalty on him under Section 112 of the Act. 5. emsp We therefore allow the appeal and set aside the order imposing a penalty on the appellant.
-
1998 (12) TMI 314 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit of penalty ... ... ... ... ..... ng the case and therefore the Commissioner had to resort to the ex parte decision on the basis of reply to the show cause notice. He has considered all the pleas made by the appellants in their reply to the show cause notice and he has come to a definite conclusion based on chemical examiner rsquo s reports that the goods are not velvet as declared, but are polyester based nylon fabric. Therefore a licence is required. The confiscation has been made correctly. Hence the stay petition be dismissed. 5. emsp We have carefully considered the pleas advanced from both the sides. We are of the view that the goods are of commercial character. Absolute confiscation is not warrantable in our prima facie view. We are therefore of the view that the goods themselves act as a security for the penalty now imposed by the Collector because the goods are admittedly valued at over Rs. 27 lakhs. Consequently we accept the stay petition and waive the penalty for the purpose of hearing the appeal.
-
1998 (12) TMI 300 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... e buyer the benefit of any price decline at actual time of shipment. If, within the time frame of the contract for supply of goods, as a result of the conditions of the contract, the supply of the goods, their price is lowered as a result of subsequent happening of events, it cannot be said that this is a special price due extraneous to consideration other than commercial. The price was therefore a normal price. The ratio of the Supreme Court in Bharat Industries v. Additional Commissioner - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 195 will apply. The fact that the appellant had own imported goods also center at a higher price is by itself insufficient to justify enhancement of value, if as a result of other factors there has been a fall in supply after the goods in the contract relied upon were shipped. Here again we must conclude that there is insufficient basis to justify enhancement of the value declared. 7. emsp These appeals are also allowed and impugned orders set aside. Consequential relief.
-
1998 (12) TMI 285 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Penalty - Smuggling ... ... ... ... ..... er the seized good can be considered to be smuggled gold. As regards the 4th gold biscuit he does not have much today because it carries the foreign marking and it has also been found to be of purity of 99.9 value. Value of this 4th gold biscuit will be around Rs. 2,000/- on the basis of valuation made by the authorities themselves As regards his plea of conscious possession there is no doubt that it has been recovered from his premises but I also note that it has nowhere been held that the delivery was made to him personally. In the circumstances, I find sufficient force in the plea of the learned Advocate that the gold could not be said to have been put in conscious possession of the appellant. Having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that no penalty at all is warranted on the appellant. Hence, I set aside the penalty of Rs. 20,000/- imposed on the appellant. Nothing stated in the order will effect the confiscation of the gold biscuits.
-
1998 (12) TMI 280 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... , we do not find any reason to stay the operation of the order. Neither the appeal nor the departmental representative are able to indicate how the goods in question are to be considered to be flint buttons, which in turn and how these are different from opthalmic blank specified in the notification. The reference to such blanks in the HSN Policy itself is prima facie no basis for denying the notification. Stay application is dismissed.
-
1998 (12) TMI 273 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Smuggling - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... he affidavit. Rajubhai S. More is supposed to have prepared the affidavit. There is no finding in the order that Khansara did not sign in his true identity or signed in an assumed identity. Identification of him therefore, prima facie, does not attract penalty. This finding would apply also to Rajubhai S. More, there is no specific act attributes by which penalty could be imposed to Upendra M. Patel. We, however, note that none of these applicants has specifically questioned the situation warranting the imposition of penalty on them but the applications contained the plea of financial hardship. In these circumstances, we consider it appropriate to ask Anilkumar H. Patel to deposit a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs (Rupees Three lakhs) and Rajubhai S. More and Upendra M. Patel to deposit a sum of Rs. 1 lakh (Rupees One lakh) deposits being made within two months from the date of receipt of this order and reporting compliance, we waive the remaining amounts of penalty and stay its recovery.
-
1998 (12) TMI 271 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... earance of goods. This applies to all cases involved. Hence the claim for all cases is rejected. 4. emsp On perusal of the Order-in-Original and the Order-in-Appeal, we find that in the Order-in-Original, it was observed by the Asst. Collector of Customs (Refunds) that the amendment in Bill of Entry under Section 149 of Customs Act, 1962 is not allowed after clearance of goods. This applies to all cases involved. Hence claim for all cases is rejected. Examining this, we find that the ld. Collector (Appeals) has not confined himself to the points decided by the Asst. Collector, but has travelled beyond the adjudication order. The only issue decided by the Asst. Collector was whether it was an amendment or it was re-assessment whereas the Collector (Appeals) has examined the issue much beyond the scope of the adjudication order. In the circumstances, we set aside the impugned Order and allow the Appeal with consequential relief, if any, to the Appellant, in accordance with law.
-
1998 (12) TMI 260 - CEGAT, , MUMBAI
Natural justice - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... hat they were nominated by Ashit Shipping Services and that he was present when the vessel was loaded by the Customs on arrival. He also says however that he has not done any personal verification to what the master of the vessel declared. Clause (f) of Section 111 would apply if the goods were not declared in the manifest, which, it is not disputed, they were not. However, this manifest was signed not by the agent but by the master of the vessel who is required to file it under Section 30. There would, in such situation, be no question of the agent doing something which the master has done. It is also to be noted that penalty has been imposed on the master of the vessel under Section 112 in the same proceedings. The facts of this case therefore do not justify applying the provision of clause (f) of Section 111. Penalties were not imposable on them. Their appeals are allowed with consequential relief. 10. emsp Accordingly, all the appeals allowed and impugned order set aside.
-
1998 (12) TMI 257 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... on notification and imposed penalty. 2. emsp After hearing the Departmental Representative, we are totally at a loss to understand prima facie how conditions of either clause (m) or (o) of Section 111 are attracted. For clause (o) to apply, the goods would have to be exempted at the time of import and the benefit of exemption notification later not fulfilled. That is not the case here. There is no finding that the imported goods were misdeclared. We therefore find a very strong prima facie case in favour of the applicant with regard to waiver of penalty, in addition to the fact that the entire duty of Rs. 1.71 crores, except to the extent of Rs. 4.00 lacs has been deposited. We therefore waive deposit of penalty and stay its recovery.
-
1998 (12) TMI 254 - CEGAT, MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... recommend any concentration of the Vitamins in the Vitamin Mixes used for this purpose. Therefore, this document even though it is only recommendatory and in no way prescribed in the Import Export Policy, is of not much help to the department for the purposes of challenging the transaction value in the present consignments under consideration. Therefore, we find that there are no prescribed standards let alone even recommended standards of concentration of Vitamins in the Vitamin Pre-Mix issue by any competent authority or by the Import Export Policy on record. 15. emsp We have also considered the Order-in-Appeal impugned in detail and find that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had independently arrived at these very conclusions in his Orders-in-Appeals impugned on this issue. 16. emsp We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the said Orders-in-Appeals impugned which compel us to interfere with the same. Therefore, the Revenue appeals are rejected as being without any merit.
-
1998 (12) TMI 251 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Import of squids as bait for catching Tuna fish ... ... ... ... ..... nst this, I find the Revenue has not been in a position to lead any such technical evidence except the World Book Encyclopedia which shows that some people eat squids. It also shows that squids are also used as fish bait. I find that the said evidence is not specific to this issue. ldquo Some People rdquo does not necessarily mean all people or people in India. It is common knowledge that squids are consumed in European countries. Further, in view of the certificates of the Directorate of Fisheries as well as Directorate of Animal Husbandry, both being Government organisations giving their opinion of the dietary habits of the Indian citizens, therefore, I find that the word ldquo some people rdquo would not necessarily apply to human beings who are citizens of India. Clearly, the balance of convenience lies in favour of the appellants. 9. emsp I, therefore, set aside the impugned Orders-in-Appeal and the appeal succeeds accordingly with consequential relief if any as per law.
-
1998 (12) TMI 244 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... mination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules 1988. To explain this, it is relevant to mention the provision of Rule 4 of the Rules. In the Rule 4, it has been specifically provided that the transaction value of the imported goods shall be the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to India, adjusted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9 of these rules. When we look into Rule 9, Clause (2) of the said rule, inter alia provides that in the case of goods imported by air, where the cost referred to in Clause (a) is ascertainable, such cost shall not exceed twenty per cent of free on board value of the goods. The mere reading of the said provision clearly will show that the Rules provide for capping of the value regarding air freight. We, therefore, are of the view that the claim made by the appellant in this case is legally tenable. Hence, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order, with consequential relief, if any in accordance with law.
-
1998 (12) TMI 240 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Custom House Agent ... ... ... ... ..... that the order itself discloses that the matter could not brook any delay and the ground of immediacy, was also spelt out in the order itself and, therefore, the Court set aside the Single Judge rsquo s order quashing the suspension order and allowed the writ appeal of the Revenue. In the case before us, however, we are not satisfied that the suspension order discloses that the matter was so urgent as to warrant action under Regulation 21(2) and the ground of immediacy is also not spelt out therefrom. 5. emsp In the result, following the ratio of the orders of the Hon rsquo ble Madras High Court in the case of East West Freight Carriers and the Hon rsquo ble Calcutta High Court rsquo s decision in the case of N.C. Singha and Sons, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. We, however, make it clear that this order does not preclude the Commissioner from exercising her powers under Regulation 21(2) of the CHALR 1984 in accordance with law. Order to be given dasti.
-
1998 (12) TMI 238 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Imports - REP licence ... ... ... ... ..... en the Appellant and department pertaining to 260 rolls of PVC sheets imported against REP licence. The facts in both the cases are similar in all respects. This is a precedent decision, which has become final. According to it, contentions in both the cases are same. Department has not produced any subsequent decision in support of its case. In the absence of it, there is no reason why the precedent decision should not be allowed, which has upheld past practice, and has examined in detail the goods involved, and test result, and past practice of the department. In this case, even though goods were available in part, it is not confiscated, even though held liable for confiscation. Penalty is imposed nearly 3 times the value of goods. The impugned order cannot be upheld. There are sufficient and satisfactory grounds to modify it, in the light of records produced and precedent decision. Point raised is answered in affirmative. Appeal is allowed with caution consequential relief.
-
1998 (12) TMI 227 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ut the existence of their products, their price and terms of supplies. The terms ldquo trade rdquo and ldquo commercial rdquo are often used interchangeably. 5. emsp It is evident that Chapter 99 has been introduced in order to simplify and speed up classification of certain goods which have been exempted from duty, and to take the place of exemption notification which would otherwise be required. All the goods in Chapter 99 are free of duty. Every item that falls for classification under this chapter will necessarily merit classification in some other chapter. Chapter 99, in other words, does not carve out, except with regard to the goods the form of or condition which is specified therein, any separate tariff heading. It only provides for classification of goods satisfying a particular condition (in this case being in form) of which would otherwise be classifiable elsewhere. 6. emsp We are therefore unable to interfere. Appeal dismissed. Cross objection is also disposed of.
-
1998 (12) TMI 226 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Import - Packing or packaging materials - Redemption fine and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... uent to the Collector rsquo s order have shown that the value of the goods was under declared and the Chartered Engineer certificate, showing the value of the machine obtained by manipulation and not containing facts and that the machine itself was sold by the importer for Rs. 93.00 lacs. It is, therefore urged that the redemption fine ought to be increased and penalty imposed. These facts do not justify interference with the order of the Collector (Appeals). This was not the basis of which confiscation and penalty were proposed. The importer did not have an opportunity to meet this case. The Collector was also not concerned with these points for determination which are urged before us, these not have arisen out of the order of the Collector. There is, therefore, no justification for upsetting his order on this ground. 7. emsp Both appeals dismissed. The so-called cross objection filed by importer is merely a written submission, and is not required to be formally disposed of.
........
|
