Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2021 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (4) TMI 571 - AT - CustomsValuation of imported goods - small printer part, big printer part and data cable - redetermination of value based on contemporaneous import data of the goods that were actually imported - SCN waived by importer itself - Confiscation of goods - redemption fine and penalty - HELD THAT:- The issue of re-determination of the duty under Section 17 when the importer gives in writing that he does not want the show cause notice and accepts the re-determination was decided by this Bench and the batch of appeals in the case of Commissioner of Customs versus Hanuman Prasad & Sons [2020 (12) TMI 1092 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] where it was held that The Commissioner (Appeals) completely failed to advert to the crucial aspect that the importers had themselves accepted the enhanced value. The Commissioner (Appeals) in fact, proceeded to examine the matter as if the assessing officer had enhanced the declared value on the basis of other factors and not on the acceptance by the importers. This casual observation is not based on the factual position that emerges from the records of the case. The appellant had indeed declared the value of the goods incorrectly and on being pointed out agreed to reassessment of duty and waived his right to show cause notice and personal hearing. The appellant also undertook to pay the fine and penalty. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is not required to issue a speaking order. The reassessment of the duty is final as it was uncontested. Considering the declared value was only about 2% of the actual value as re-determined, it is found that the Adjudicating Authority was correct in confiscating the goods under Section 111 (m). Quantum of redemption fine - HELD THAT:- Second proviso to Section 125 places an upper limit of fine that it should not exceed the market price of the goods confiscated. In this case, the assessable value of the goods which are confiscated is ₹ 9,21,951/- and the penalty imposed was only ₹ 2 lakhs, which was further reduced to ₹ 1 lakh by the First Appellate Authority. The amount of fine imposed is, therefore, only about 11% of the assessable value which given the facts and circumstances of the case is just and fair. Penalty u/s 112 (a) of Customs Act - HELD THAT:- The penalty imposable under Section 114AA can be upto five times the value of the goods - In the present case, the actual duty was re-determined as ₹ 1,60,327/-, whereas the duty which would have been paid as per the assessee declaration was only ₹ 2,634/-. Thus, the duty sought to be evaded was over ₹ 1,50,000/- and the penalty imposed under Section 112 (a) read with Section 114AA was only ₹ 90,000/-, which was further reduced to ₹ 40,000/- by First Appellate Authority. This is a fair amount of penalty - Penalty upheld. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|