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

2013 (9) TMI 100

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... iability willingly - he cannot turn around and now say that the valuation done by the Customs authorities was not sustainable in law – determination of the value by the Customs authorities and the confirmation of duty demand As regards absolute confiscation of goods during the hearing before us, the appellant had pleaded for allowing re-export of these goods. We find merit in this request - Re-export of toys were allowed. Confiscation of goods U/s 111(d) – Penalty u/s and 112(a) and 114A - Held that:- Redemption fine was reduced – Considering the assessable value of the goods the redemption fine imposed was on the higher side - Held that:- There was no reason to interfere with the amount of penalty in case of mis-declaration on the part .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f metal, chess game, erasers, stickers, empty pencil pouch, magic jelly, sun glasses, empty sunglass boxes, metal frames without glasses LED TV and so on. On examination, it was found that in respect of nine cartons the goods were to be other than those declared and the goods also contained plastic toys. Since the country of origin was from China, in terms of DGFT Notification No. 82/(RE-2008)/2004-2009, dated 2-3-2009, import of toys from China requires a certificate from the competent authority and inasmuch as the impugned goods did not have any such certificate, it appears that the toys were restricted for imports. Since the goods were of mixed nature and did not carry any specification like model No., MRP etc., it was difficult to ascer .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h and Rs. 2 lakhs were imposed on Shri Hanif Kapadia, Director of the importing firm under Sections 114A and 112(a) ibid respectively. It is against this order the appellant is before us. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant makes the following submissions. 3.1 In the instant case, the value was initially increased from Rs. 5,67,002 to Rs. 11,51,495.33 by the assessing group. Further loading done now to Rs. 59,10,887/- is not sustainable in law. He relies on the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Hitaishi Fine Kraft Indus. Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, West Bengal - 2002 (148) E.L.T. 364 (Tri.-Kolkata) in support of the above contention. The learned Counsel further submits that in respect of one item, the value has bee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t any protest. In these circumstances, the appellant cannot turn around and now say that there was no mis-declaration on their part or the value has been arrived at incorrectly. 4.1 As regards the confiscation of the toys, the learned A.R. submits that plastic toys imported from China require a certificate from an appropriate authority. In the absence of such certificate the imports are restricted and therefore, absolute confiscation is justified. In the light of these submissions she prays for upholding the order passed by the adjudicating authority. 5. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. 6. As regards the reliance placed by the learned Counsel in the case of Hitaishi Fine Kraft Indus Pvt. Ltd. and Aggarwal Distributo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e goods. We find merit in this request. Accordingly, we allow re-export of toys valued at Rs. 40,723/- in accordance with law. 6.1 As regards the quantum of fine and penalty imposed on the appellant, considering the assessable value of the goods at around Rs. 60 lakhs, the redemption fine imposed of Rs. 15 lakhs is on the higher side. If we take the cum duty price, the same will come to Rs. 75 lakhs approximately. Therefore, we reduce the redemption fine from Rs. 15 lakhs to 7.5 lakhs. 6.2 Regarding the equivalent penalty imposed on the importer under Section 114A, we do not find any reason to interfere with the same as it is clear case of mis-declaration on the part of the appellant. Therefore imposition of equivalent penalty under Sec .....

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