9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Hon'ble High Court of Madras which was disposed by order dated 11.4.2017, inter alia with the following directions: "5. I do not think that the petitioner can seek indulgence of this Court by filing the present writ petition, more particularly, when he has chosen to file an appeal before the CESTAT, challenging the concurrent findings of the authority, as stated supra and the said appeal is also yet to be numbered. 6. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to work out his remedy before the CESTAT in the appeal including by seeking for an interim relief, if such relief is maintainable. Without doing so, the petitioner is not justified in approaching this Court. 7. Therefore, I am inclined not to entertain this writ petition not on the merits of the matter, but on the reason that the petitioner has to work out such remedy only before the CESTAT where he has already filed an appeal. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application seeking for interim relief and if any such application is filed, the same shall be considered and order shall be passed on its own merits and in accordance with law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which have extensive application in common products of daily use, and 699 kgs of N35 and related magnets. (vi) On the basis of the end usage for each of the category of magnets, and in consonance with the data of contemporaneous imports, that ought to be adopted for valuation of the consignment, the assessable value declared in the Bill of Entry No. 7696971 is true and correct." 4.2 To a specific query, Id. Counsel clarified that the acronyms N35 C8, N50, N35, N45 etc. are technical terms for different types of magnets having different composition and properties which are internationally accepted. 4.3 In respect of N35 and other such specified types of magnets, he submits that the contemporaneous data adopted by the department has been based on N(SH) magnets and grades other than those imported which are having different composition and material and hence are not comparable. That in respect of ferrite magnets, these are predominantly used as for white board magnets, small headphone speaker, magnetic clips, magnets of metal chess board coins, magnetic toys, fridge magnets and are much lower in quality and price. That they have imported ferrite magnets in different quantities and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of grades of magnet imported. 4.6 Ld. Advocate further contends that no notice was issued to them for rejecting the declared transaction value in terms of Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The magnets imported by them are of different grades, types and have different uses and applications, obviously therefore, the prices of each such grade type will different. However, the department has unilaterally fixed a uniform price for each grades / types of magnets. 4.7 To a query, Ld. Advocate states that based on the transaction values declared by them at import, the customs duty liability would only be Rs. 2.80 lakhs. 5.1 On the other hand, Id. AR Shri B. Balamurugan submits that the declared value of magnets of various grades and sizes was rejected only on the basis of contemporaneous imports and are determined under Rule 5 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 by adopting the value of similar goods. 5.2 Ld. AR further submits that although N35 and higher grades like N45 etc. have been imported, lesser value of N35 has only been adopted in respect of all such grades. So also, for ferrite magnets, reasonable value based on contemporaneous import has been ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment if that is not the internationally accepted practice in transactions between foreign sellers and importers in India. 7.5 The other crucial aspect in this appeal concerns the appellants prayer for interim relief by way of release of goods covered in the above Bill of Entry which are still lying in the custody of the department. The Hon'ble High Court of Madras, in their order dated 11.4.2017 in W.P. No. 7269/2017 has inter alia granted opportunity to the appellant to file appropriate application seeking interim relief and has ruled that in case if any such application is filed, the same shall be considered and order shall be passed on its own merits and in accordance with law. In this regard, we find that the goods are lying in the custody of the department at least from 3.12.2016 when the Bill of Entry No. 7696971 had been filed. Thus, for almost nine months the goods have been lying in Customs custody, presumably in the Docks ICFS. Appellants do have a point in their contention that the magnetic properties of the imported goods would deteriorate over long periods of storage. In any case due to this imbroglio, neither has the importer been able to clear his goods for hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
