Customs valuation and import licensing require independent evidence before rejecting declared value or imposing penalties.

Imports of old and used digital multifunction printers made before the relevant cut-off date were treated as freely importable, so no specific import licence or separate permission was required under the applicable customs circular regime. The article also notes that declared value cannot be rejected as misdeclared merely because it was enhanced on the basis of a Chartered Engineer's certificate; independent corroborative evidence of undervaluation or deliberate misdeclaration is required. On the facts discussed, the confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were not sustainable, and the import was considered permissible without a special licence.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether import of the old and used digital multifunction printer required a specific import licence or permission under the applicable customs circular regime. (ii) Whether enhancement of value on the basis of a Chartered Engineer's certificate, without other corroborative material, could justify treating the declared value as misdeclared.

Issue (i): Whether import of the old and used digital multifunction printer required a specific import licence or permission under the applicable customs circular regime.

Analysis: The Bill of Lading preceded 28.02.2013, and the same class of goods had already been held to be freely importable for that period. The Tribunal applied the earlier view that, for such imports made before the cut-off date, there was no restriction requiring a special licence or separate permission.

Conclusion: The requirement of a specific import licence or permission was not attracted, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether enhancement of value on the basis of a Chartered Engineer's certificate, without other corroborative material, could justify treating the declared value as misdeclared.

Analysis: The declared description, quantity and value were accepted, and the value enhancement rested only on the Chartered Engineer's certificate. In the absence of independent corroborative evidence showing deliberate undervaluation or misdeclaration, the declared value could not be rejected merely on that basis.

Conclusion: The declared value could not be treated as misdeclared, and this issue was also decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The confiscation, redemption fine and penalty could not be sustained, and the import was held to be permissible without a special licence on the facts found.

Ratio Decidendi: Where import is made before the relevant cut-off date and no independent corroborative evidence of undervaluation exists, a declared import value cannot be discarded merely because it has been enhanced on the basis of a Chartered Engineer's certificate.

---