9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and after examination, a Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2011 was issued by the D.R.I. wherein the impugned goods were proposed to be considered as 'other than old and used garments' and the value was proposed to be re-determined at Rs.22,27,068.68/- as against the declared value of Rs.5,12,912.59/- on the basis of wholesale market price. Accordingly, the Notice demanded Rs.90,97,345/- out of which Rs.82,320/- was already paid by the appellant. 3. The Notice was adjudicated by the Ld. Commissioner of Customs (Port) vide Order-in-Original dated 11.03.2016, wherein the Ld. Commissioner has upheld the goods as 'old and used garments' classifying the same under Customs Tariff Heading 6309. The declared value was enhanced from US$ 0.55 per kg to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Customs Valuation Rules. 5.1 Accordingly, the Revenue prayed for setting aside the impugned order. 6. The Respondent prayed for rejecting the department's appeal. 7. Heard both parties and perused the appeal documents. 8. We observe that the Revenue has filed this appeal for determination of correct classification, valuation and for enhancement of redemption fine and penalty. 8.1 In the present case, the Respondent has imported old and used garments classifiable under Customs Tariff Item No. 6309 90 00 of the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. We observe that the Ld. Commissioner has given an elaborate finding in the impugned order and upheld the classification of the goods as goods as 'old and used garments' clas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ling of bills of entry. In these circumstances, invoking of Section 111(m) which applies to '111(m) any goods which do not correspond in respect of value or in any other particular with the entry made under this Act or in the case of baggage with the declaration made under Section 77 in respect thereof or in the case of goods under transhipment, with the declaration for transhipment referred to in the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 54;' does not appear to be in conformity with law. Confiscation of goods is empowered when material particulars are withheld or incorrectly recorded in the declaration which, for the purpose of Section 111 of Customs Act, 1962, is the bill of entry. Therefore, whatever would be the finding on the descr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue of mis-declared goods. That part of the remand order appears impossible to comply with ex post facto in the light of the finding that '4. From the examination report (only one consignment was subjected to 100% examination on first check basis), which was already on record it appeared that imports in these cases were of a mixed lot consisting of used garments and also 40% to 50% mutilated single cut garments. xxxx 20. Before proceeding further it is pertinent here to state that the exact description and quantity of goods, container wise, cannot be determined at this stage since no 100% examination of all containers was done at the time of clearance of goods. At any event all the importers had agreed during the personal hearing condu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
