TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 526X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion Machines, lenient view is taken on such import and imported used MFD are released on payment of redemption fine of 10% penalty of 5%. From the decision in ACCORD DIGITECH VERSUS C. C-BANGALORE [ 2020 (12) TMI 647 - CESTAT BANGALORE] passed by this Tribunal, it is clearly evident that the used Digital Multifunction Printing and Copying Machine were released on payment of redemption fine of 10% and penalty of 5% of the enhanced value of the imported goods - This was also followed by this Bench in the case of SR ENTERPRISES AND DIGITAL EXPRESS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE [ 2021 (9) TMI 1251 - CESTAT BANGALORE] wherein the redemption fine and penalty was 10% and 5% respectively. Thus, in the interest of justice since ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he matter by allowing redemption of goods on payment of redemption fine and penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed present appeal. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the import of used digital multifunction machines were subject matter in large number of cases including the case law referred by the Appellate Authority. Since the issue regarding confiscation of the goods is settled by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs v/s M/s Atul Automation Pvt.Ltd, dated 24.01.2019, goods are liable for confiscation. Regarding quantum of fine and penalty, learned counsel draws our attention to various decisions of this Tribunal in similar case and held that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue for ascertaining the market value and to determine the redemption fine, Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in the ibid matter of M/s S.R. Enterprises, issue was related to import of very same goods against Bill of Entry No.4620026 dated 30.12.2017 and the present appeal is related to very same goods imported on July 2017. The learned counsel further submits that when this Tribunal remanded the matter for denovo adjudication directing adjudication authority to find out the market value of the goods and to quantify the redemption fine and penalty, aggrieved by the said order, the respondent filed appeal before the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka and only on dismissal of the departmental appeal, Adjudication Authority conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant and the Revenue. The Original Authority had redetermined the value of the 204 units of used Digital Multifunction Printing and Copying Machine (MFDs) at value of Rs.33,35,406/-. He held that goods were liable for absolute confiscation and imposed 100% penalty equivalent to the value of the goods on the imported goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order had held that the goods are not liable for absolute confiscation but are to be released on payment of redemption fine. He further upheld 100% penalty equivalent to the value of the imported goods. The appellant now is in appeal only to the extent of redemption fine and penalty since he has accepted the enhanced value as per the Chartered Engineer s certificate. 6. It is s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
