TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 740X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0.1230 per piece for the purpose of levy of customs duty and confirmed differential duty demand of Rs. 12,19,341/-. Penalties were also imposed on the importing firm M/s. Shri Ganesh Overseas, its Proprietor Shri Tarak S. Shukla, Shri Bhagavatiprasad Anil Kumar Vasant alias Ketan Vasant, Shri Harsh Anil Kumar Vasant alias Tikkubhai Vasant and Shri Dilip A. Goplani. 3. The present appeal for the importer has been filed by Shri Ketan Vasant as power of Attorney holder of Prasad Gaurishankar Shukla, successor-in-interest of Shri Tarak S. Shukla, after the demise of Shri Tarak S. Shukla. The prayer in the appeal is to accept the declared value for the purpose of assessment and to set aside the confiscation of the goods. There is no challenge to the penalty imposed on the firm and its Proprietor Shri Tarak S. Shukla as it has been stated that the penalty imposed on them has abated upon the death of Proprietor on 11-3-2000. The appeal has also sought quashing of the demand for interest. The other appeals are directed against the imposition of penalties on them. 4. Brief facts, relevant for the decision of the appeals are that M/s Shri Ganesh Overseas filed Bill of Entry No. 6859/98, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... WM-034B Y102 25,900 pcs @ 0.75 19,425.00 WM-034BZ198 28,953 pcs @ 0.75 21,714.00 WM-034BZ198K 81,000 pcs @ 0.75 60,750.00 WM-034BZ221 1,900 pcs @ 0.75 1,425.00 WM-034CY102 20,800 pcs @ 0.75 15,600.00 WM-034CY524 31,200 pcs @ 0.75 23,400.00 WM-034CZ221 20,000 pcs @ 0.75 15,000.00 WM-034CZ221A 9,000 pcs @ 0.75 6,750.00 WM-034CZ240B 72,7000 pcs @ 0.75 54,525.00 WM-034DM212A 2,000 pcs @ 0.75 1,500.00 TOTAL : (25) TWENTY FIVE CARTONS 476,753pcs 357,564,75 MATSUMOTO CO. LTD.Sd/-Y. Matsumoto 5. The goods were seized by the Customs authorities based on information that they had been under valued. During inquiries, Shri Tarak S. Shukla, Proprietor of the importing firm, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The second objection is that the imports of M/s. Webel Communication are not comparable in time to the present consignment inasmuch as the two consignments imported by M/s. Webel were on 4-4-98 3-2-99. The learned Counsel for the appellant emphasized during hearing that Rule 8 of Customs Valuation Rules relied upon by the Commissioner for enhancing the value did not permit the application of the value of one variety of goods to the value of another variety of goods. The Counsel also relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Navnit V. Shroff v. Commissioner of Customs (ACC), Mumbai, 2002 (139) E.L.T. 650 in support of this submission. It was also stressed during hearing that according to the evidence of M/s. National Panasonic, Ahmedabad (relied upon by the Departmental authorities itself) suffix after WM-034 signify the series and the particular user and the price may change if the suffix change for a particular series. It was also pointed out that prices may be determined based on the specific type required by customer. During the hearing of the case, learned Counsel for the appellant pointed out that model imported by M/s. Webel Communication was not one of the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scenes and the importer had no connection with the import. His name was only being used by Shri Ketan Vasant and Tikku Bhai Vasant to get the undervalued goods cleared through customs. She submitted that in these circumstances, customs authorities were right in rejecting the invoice value. 11. With regard to the valuation of the goods, learned SDR contended that it is clear from the literature on the goods that WM-034 model was used in telephone and the suffix only distinguished certain sub-models based on their features. All the same, it remains that WM-034 sub-models are similar. The appellant s submission regarding price variation depending upon the variation in sub-model, according to the learned SDR, is based only on the evidence tendered by M/s National Panasonic. It is not based on any import data. Learned SDR emphasized that it was not open to the appellants to raise this argument since their own import of 16 sub-models are being made without any price variation whatsoever depending upon sub-model. All the sub-models have been invoiced at the same price. The learned SDR pointed out that the Microphone imported by M/s. Webel Communication are also of WM-034 model. Therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the import of the goods, and had paid the appellant for clearing the goods from customs. In these circumstances, the customs authorities were entirely justified in rejecting the declared value and invoice value. As to the correctness of the method adopted for valuation, it is not in dispute that the value adopted was of the same model of microphone. Even though much is being made of the evidence of M/s. National Panasonic that price of microphones varied depending upon the sub-model of the microphone, that evidence is no reason for rejecting the comparable value. The appellants themselves were importing a large consignment of about 5 lakhs pieces at a common unit value for different sub-models. There is no substance to the grievance that Webel imports were not contemporaneous. The appellant s Bill of Entry was filed in Nov., 1998. The second import by Webel was within three months of this on 3rd Feb., 1999. Further, Webel s earlier import in April, 1998 was also at the same price. Therefore, the action of the customs authorities in adopting the value of microphone imported by M/s. Webel cannot be faulted. A perusal of note to Rule 8 also makes it clear that that rule provides for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
