9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 533X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dt. 30-4-2008 Commissioner (A), Hyderabad. C/453/2008 M/s. Raghvendra Xerox v. CC No. 19/2008 (H-II) Cus. dt. 25-4-2008 -do- C/454/2008 M/s. Miranda Services v. CC No. 20/2008 (H-II) Cus. dt. 30-4-2008 -do- C/455/2008 M/s. Miranda Services v. CC No. 21/2008 (H-II) Cus. dt. 30-4-2008 -do- C/431/2005 CC v. M/s. Ram Impex No. 1 & 2/2005 dt. 29-8-2005 Commissioner of Customs (A), Cochin. 2. The issue is common in all these appeals and hence, they are taken up together for disposal as per law. 3. The issue involved in these appeals is rejection of transaction value in respect of second-hand photocopier machines and the revenue has re-determined the same under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules. The second issue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue appeal on the very issue was rejected by the Karnataka High Court and the judgment of the Kerala High Court in the case of CC, Cochin v. Atual Commodities (P) Ltd. - 2006 (202) E.L.T. 392 (Ker.) holding that licence is required, was not accepted by the Karnataka High Court. 4. The learned consultant submits that Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CCE & CC, Hyderabad v. M/s. Balaji Office Equipments in Civil Appeal No. 52/2005 dated 4-10-2005 have taken the same view as taken by the Karnataka High Court and revenue appeal has been dismissed. Therefore, he submits that there is no requirement for the appellant to take licence for importing the second-hand photocopier. He further submits that valuation arrived at by them should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The present situation and the law is that the transaction value cannot be rejected in absence of better evidence placed by the revenue. The Apex Court has followed its earlier ruling rendered in the case of Eicher Tractors Ltd. (supra); Vadilal Dairy International Ltd. v. CC, Bombay - 2005 (180) E.L.T. 436 (S.C.); Tolin Rubbers Pvt. Ltd. v. CC, Cochin - 2004 (163) E.L.T. 289 (S.C.), CC, Calcutta v. South India Television (P) Ltd. - 2007 (214) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) and unreported judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Commissioner of Customs v. J.D. Orgochem Ltd. rendered in Civil Appeal No. 5843/2006 decided on 10-4-2008 [2008 (226) E.L.T. 9 (S.C.)]. In view of this position, we have to accept the transaction value as submitted by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ). Following the ratio of this judgment, we hold that the assessee are not required to obtain licence for importing second-hand photocopier machines during the relevant period, as they were capital goods and the EXIM. Policy did not provide for obtaining licence in respect of second-hand photocopier machines imported as capital goods. The fine and penalties imposed are set aside. The party's appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any. C/431/2005 - Commissioner of Customs (A), Cochin v. M/s. Ram Impex 7. In this revenue appeal, the revenue has not challenged the valuation adopted by the department but they are aggrieved with the setting aside of fine and penalty in the impugned order by the Commissioner (A). Since, we have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
