TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 49
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther for consideration and decision. The subject matter of these appeals mainly concerns with the classification and valuation of old and used tyres , imported by various appellant importers. 2. The appellants have been represented by Shri P. P. Jadeja, Ld. Consultant and Shri Amal Paresh Dave, Ld. Advocate, and the Revenue has been represented by Ld. AR, Dr. J. Nagori. 3. Based on the appeal memoranda and written submissions/synopses, the ld. Consultant and ld. Advocate interalia mainly submit as under:- (i) The appellants imported used Tyres and they have declared correctly as used Tyres . (ii) The appellants believed that classification of tyres should/could be under Chapter 40122090 (iii) The classification of goods has to be decided on the basis of conditions of goods at the time of its import. (iv) The conditions of goods at the time of import should decide classification and value of goods in question. (v) The appellants submit that visual examination of goods shows that about 60% to 70% tyres cannot be used as such and the remaining 30% to 40% maybe used on Indian Roads but not for the Bus, Truck or light commercial or passenger vehicles. The tyres have residual....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....action value with reliable evidences on one hand and on the other hand enhancement of value is not proved with any reliable evidences by the revenue. (iii) The enhancement of value of goods is incorrect and illegal, and consequently the proposed enhancement of value deserves to be set-aside. (iv) In case of M.U. Traders [2010 (252) ELT 574 (Tri.-Ahmd.)] CESTAT has held that enhancement of value without giving the details of contemporaneous import from the same country and the same size could not be upheld; that assessee purchased stocklot, some good quality tyres always would be found-Intention to misdeclare classification not upheld. (v) There is inherent contradiction in findings in OIO and for adopting the basis for valuation of goods in question. Assessable value is taken without MARKET INQUIREY of tyres and its residual life. (vii) Reliance is placed upon the following case laws:- (a) M/s M. U. Traders vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar 2010 (252) ELT-574 (b) M/s G.K. Exports vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar 2013 (298) ELT 560 (Tri.- Ahmd.) 4. The Ld. AR, Dr. J. Nagori, for the Revenue based on the written submissions interalia mainly submits as under:- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bai 1998 (98) ELT 381 (Tribunal) 5. We have carefully considered the facts of these appeal cases, the submissions of all the appellants and the Revenue and the case laws cited. 6. These appeals mainly concern with the following three issues:- (i) Classification of import goods, (ii) Valuation of import goods, and (iii) Imposition of penalties. 7. Firstly we take up the issue of classification of the subject goods namely old and used tyres . There is no dispute that the import goods are 'old and used tyres' . The goods have been examined 100% and it is found that certain percentage of goods can be used as such for respective vehicles i.e. Buses/Lorries or for auto vehicles but in general for the residual life of said tyres only and would find classification under Chapter Heading Nos. 40122010 and 40122020 as per their use in the respective vehicles/equipment mentioned in the description of these chapter headings in the Customs Tariff. For the items which will be used as such and where classification will be under Customs Tariff Heading Nos. 40122010 and 40122020 there is no dispute that the import goods (old and used pneumatic tyres) are under the restricted categor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....utovehicles considering their current condition, would be under CTH No. 40122090, which is in the category of "Other" . Once the remaining tyres, which as per Revenue requires repairs/retreading before their use, have been held to be classified under CTH No. 40122090, as per the Import Policy, there is no requirement of any import license for their import. The Customs (Revenue), therefore, cannot have Import Policy Objection for their clearance for home consumption. 8. In respect of valuation, the appellants mainly argue that the transaction value is irregularly rejected by the Revenue. The appellants state that the goods have been purchased as stock lot and on per ton (weight) basis. In other words, these goods have been purchased aboard, mainly as scrap. Revenue, interalia, argues that they have arrived at their value by inspection of each tyre by the expert surveyor/valuer and the appellants had not objected to such valuation at the time of clearance of the goods. 8.1. Revenue states that once the classification has been found misdeclared, value is necessarily to be questioned and rejected; and when they have not found identical or similar goods to decide on the valuation, the....