Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1988 (3) TMI 195

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... authority has re-determined the value, of the goods at Rs. 99,670, ordered confiscation of the goods under Section 111(d) and Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962, adjudging fine in lieu of confiscation at Rs. 1,00,000/- and has also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the appellant under Section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant is in appeal against this order. 2. We have heard both sides and have carefully considered the matter. To take the Import Trade Control aspect first, objection of the Additional Collector is two-fold :- (i) On examination of the consignment, the goods were actually found to be PVC floor coverings of thickness ranging between 0.81 mm to 0.85 mm; import of PVC floor coverings of thickness 0.8 mm a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. We hold that the appellant had not committed any violation of the Import Trade Control on the above two counts. 3. However, so far as the valuation aspect is concerned, the story is quite different. The appellant submitted the sale invoice issued by a Hong Kong party. The goods had actually been shipped from Korea. The invoice issued by the Hong Kong party showed the rate at US $ 0.82 per meter and the total value at US $ 5,904. However, the insurance policy for the consignment mentioned the total value of the goods at US $ 8,694. The Special Investigation Branch of the Custom House received an information that the appellant had imported PVC floor coverings in the guise of PVC Sheets. The office and residential premises of the appellan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ness sense and one cannot help feeling that the appellant was out to commit some mischief and camouflage it by involving an intermediary in Hong Kong. The appellant says that the value as stated in the insurance policy was not the true value of the goods; the appellant had purchased the import licence at a premium and he wanted the premium amount also to be covered by the insurance policy. But the original insurance policy as recovered on search of his premises does not bear it out. We have often noticed that Marine insurance is usually done for 110% of the value of the goods, in order to cover the overheads as well. The original insurance policy cited the number of the Korean manufacturer s invoice, gave the basic invoice value of the good .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates