Customs valuation of shipping expenses cannot be enhanced without proof of suppression, while prohibited imports may still face confiscation.

Shipping expenses separately shown in invoices could not be enhanced in the absence of evidence of suppression, so the valuation adjustment was set aside. Confiscation of the imported machines was upheld because the goods were more than ten years old and not legally permissible for import, but the redemption fine and penalty were reduced as excessive in the circumstances. The matter thus resulted in partial relief on valuation, while the confiscation remained in force with moderated monetary consequences.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether enhancement of shipping expenses, while re-determining the value of imported goods, was sustainable; and (ii) whether confiscation of the imported machines and the penalties imposed were to be upheld or modified.

Issue (i): Whether enhancement of shipping expenses, while re-determining the value of imported goods, was sustainable.

Analysis: The shipping charges were separately shown in the invoices, and no evidence was produced to show suppression of the actual shipping expenses. The enhancement of those charges at the same rate as the goods' value was therefore unsupported.

Conclusion: The enhancement of shipping expenses was not sustainable and was set aside, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether confiscation of the imported machines and the penalties imposed were to be upheld or modified.

Analysis: The import was of machines more than ten years old, which were not permissible for import under law. On that basis, confiscation was justified, but the monetary consequences were considered excessive in the circumstances.

Conclusion: Confiscation was upheld, while the redemption fine and penalty were reduced.

Final Conclusion: The challenge succeeded only in part: the valuation adjustment towards shipping expenses was deleted, confiscation remained in force, and the fine and penalty were moderated.

Ratio Decidendi: Where shipping expenses are separately evidenced in invoices and no suppression is shown, their enhancement cannot be sustained; however, unlawful import of prohibited goods may still justify confiscation with reduced monetary penalties depending on the facts.

---