2000 (11) TMI 610

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....declared for each consignment of 1000 kgs. was Rs. 83,255 CIF. The department was of the view that this consignment was undervalued. It found that carboxylic acid imported from Germany at this time was invoiced at around DM 400 per kg. Applying that price the value of each of these consignment would work out to Rs. 7,88,000/- CIF. The department's enquiries also showed that the consignee in the master airway bill for the consolidated cargo, of which these consignments formed part, was M/s. Jac Air Services (as the agent for the cargo consolidator at Hong Kong), of which the managing director was Lalit Jobanputra. Jobanputra was the proprietor of Jac Enterprises, the custom house agent that was appointed by the importer to clear the cargo th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Commissioner has not at all dealt with these contentions. His entire finding on the valuation of the goods is contained in a short paragraph (following 12 pages of narration of facts and submissions). In this paragraph, he does not even touch upon the issue of comparability of goods. All that he says is that there was an intention to conceal the country of origin of the goods by repacking them at Hong Kong and therefore the transaction value is not acceptable. 5. Even if we accept the view implicit in this statement, that the goods were not of Chinese origin, the Commissioner would have still to answer whether the price of goods of German origin could be applied to them; unless it were shown that they were of German origin, the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....either of Chinese origin or of unknown origin, with goods of German manufacture would still remain. The appellant had pointed out before the Commissioner on the merits of carboxylic acid from China had taken place and storage in the data basis of the customs department would reveal duties of such import. The Commissioner has not answered this point. There is therefore no material to conclude that imported goods were undervalued. The enhancement of their value, their confiscation and penalty on their importer cannot be sustained. 8. This conclusion would itself be sufficient to hold that penalty was not imposable on Jobanputra. Even otherwise, on the assumption that the goods were undervalued, we still do not find a case for such pen....