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

2024 (8) TMI 1353

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ew of the description of goods, the bill of entry was assessed on 19.10.2016 on the basis of documents submitted by the appellant and duty leviable came to tune of Rs. 4,02,014/-. The subject goods after assessment thereof were ordered for examination (2nd check). During the course of examination, the examiner found that the subject goods in the shape of Aluminium Wire and the Assistant Commissioner (Docks) has submitted the examination report as under:- "It is to report that 21.110 MTs of the goods which were found as "Coils of Aluminium Wire of Uniform Diameter of 10MM" nowhere fits within the definition of Aluminium Scrap Tassel and hence the consignment to that extent is grossly mis-decalred to evade the Customs duty." 1.1 The examin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sixty two paise only) shall be appropriated against the recovery of the above confirmed demand; 2. I confiscate the entire Consignment of the goods imported vide bill of antry no. 7155791 dated 19.10.2016 yalued at Rs.27,44,300/- (Rupees Twenty seven lakh forty four thousand three hundred only) 111(f), 111(1) & 111(m) of the Customs Act-1962. I however give an option to the said importer M/s Kana Metal Corporation to redeem the imported goods on payment of fine of Rs.2,70,000/- (Rupees Two lakh seventy thousand only) under section 125 of the Customs Act 1962. 3. I classify the goods 21.110 MT of 'Coils of Aluminum Wire having uniform diameter of 10 mm" imported vide bill of entry no. 7153791 dated 19.10.2016 under CTH 76051100. 4 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... neither any change of rate of duty and nor value is required. He submits that the examiner only on eye estimation given a report that goods in 'Coils of Aluminium Wire of Uniform Diameter of 10MM'. It is his submission that since, the goods was not the fresh material of coils of wire, they have requested for second opinion from the Chartered Engineer but the Assessing Officer /Adjudicating Authority has not allowed the same. Therefore, there is a clear violation of natural justice. He submits that on the contrary of the examination report, the appellant have submitted the independent Chartered Engineer Certificate which has certified that the goods is 'Aluminium Scrap Tassel as per ISRI' and not the virgin Aluminium Wire. He further submits .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pellant strongly objected the above report and requested for re-examination and second opinion on nature of the goods. However, the same was not accepted by the Assistant Commissioner. 4.1 We find that the fair opportunity should have been given to the assessee to defend their case and denial of re-examination of the goods is in violation of principle of natural justice. Contrary to the report of examination, the appellant have submitted the independent Chartered Engineer Certificate issued by Shri G. Venkatapathy M., who in his report dated 30.12.2016, opined as under :- "(i) the goods consist of discarded Aluminium Wire Rod in loose and strapped bundles, (ii) there are 8 strapped. bundles and rest of the Wire Rod are in loose form, (ii .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... from the look of the product, it may appear as Aluminium Wire but the same carries various defect, cut, etc., hence it will clearly falls under Aluminium scrap. Therefore, in the facts of the present case, we are of the view that the appellant have correctly classified the goods as Aluminium Scrap under RITC 76020010 and since, the nature of goods is clearly as per the descriptions declared in the bill of entry, the enhancement of the value being consequently to the claim of the Revenue, the enhancement of value will also not be sustainable. 5. As per the above discussion and findings, the impugned order is not sustainable. Hence, the same is set aside. Appeal is allowed. ( Pronounced in the open court on 27. 08. 2024 )
Case laws, Dec .....

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