TMI Blog1997 (9) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lty and increasing the value of the engines of the appellant. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common both these appeals are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Advocate for the appellants says that he does not wish to challenge the confiscation of the engines on the ground that their import action required a licence. He says that he accepts that the goods are used automobile engines and that in the absence of an import licence confiscation under Section 111(d) is not questioned. He however, questions the remaining parts of the orders i.e. the enhancement of value the quantum of redemption fine and penalty. 3. Each of the appellants imported 96 engines and declared the value to be of Rs. 4,15,056/- per consignment. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on other orders of the valuation would be incorrect as a second hand goods, could not be compared with other second hand goods. 5. The Chartered Engineers Certificate issued by M/s. Universal Marine and Consultancy (Pte) Ltd., Singapore referred in each case be used industrial engines for polishing and grinding. The appellant accepts that these goods are in fact used automobile diesel engines. The contention of the departmental representative that such engine could not be used for polishing and grinding in view of the differences in speed and torque ratio has significance. If the goods which the Chartered Engineer examined and valued were raised automobile diesel engines one would expect the certificate to say so. The description in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion by an expert panel. The same panel, it would further appear, arrived at different value for each of the consignments. The reason for the higher value taken for the engines imported by M/s. Atma Singh and Sons has not been indicated. To the extent that the report of the panel was not made available to the appellants there is a failure of natural justice. Each of the appellants would not be in a position to question the correctness of the report by leading evidence or by questioning the basis of the report. We, however, agree that unless the condition and extent of the few lots is established to be similar, comparison with other second hand engines is not justifiable. To that extent reliance by the appellant on other orders is misplaced. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
