TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 420
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed off by this common order as they are from a common Order-in-Appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Shri M. Kudubdeen arrived at Trichy Customs Airport from Bangkok by Flight No. UL133 and attempted to cross through green channel. He was intercepted by the Customs officer and was enquired by the officer about the contents of his baggage, to this the passenger answered that he was having some electronic goods, liquor bottles and one Samsung TV. On verification of his Customs card it was found that the passenger had not declared the value of dutiable goods and intentionally left blank the value column. On a reasonable belief that the passenger might be carrying goods in commercial quantity his baggage was subjected to detailed examination. On examination of his baggage it was found that passenger had brought with him two Pioneer car decks valued at Rs. 8,000/- one Sony home theatre valued at Rs. 8,000/- one Samsung 55" TV- Slim Smart 8 series valued at Rs. 1,30,000 /- two DVD Players valued at Rs. 8,000/- two liquor bottles valued at Rs.,000/-3 Cigarette cartons valued at Rs. 1,500/- and 12 T-shirts valued at Rs. 1,200/- (Total=Rs.1,57,700/- only) as hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellate Authority has concluded that the applicant is eligible for full free allowance on the only, that the goods brought by the applicant are not the prohibited/restricted goods. After arriving at the above conclusion, the Commissioner (Appeals) has ordered to release the said goods on payment of fine and penalty which is contrary to law. The applicant has brought bona fide goods as held by the Commissioner (Appeals) on which the question of taking penal action does not arise. That the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is confusing on imposition of fine and penalty on the said goods. The applicant has brought bona fide baggage. This has been accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals). As such all the goods need to be released unconditionally on payment of duty. 4.1.3 That the Commissioner (Appeals) has concluded that the value fixed by the Department is based on the prevailing market prices. The applicant plea is also the same. It is an accepted norm that assessment cannot be done on the basis of prevailing market price. The market price includes the duty element. This has to be deducted from the market price. Further, the market price includes profit margin, which also has to b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ance wrongly allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Trichy. 4.2.4 That in view of above the Applicant Department prays for modification of the order to the extent of denying the free allowance considering the facts of the case that applicant is a habitual offender and a short visitor and the goods brought by the applicant cannot be considered as bonafide baggage in terms of Section 79 of the Customs Act, 1962 or pass such any other order as deem fit. 5. The applicant has also filed an application dated 27.09.2013 for condonation of delay of 37 days in filing the Revision Application on the following grounds: 5.1 That he is an Indian national and having passport and permanently residing at Tamil Nadu and he brought the electronics goods but the officers seized the same as if he brought the goods for commercial and adjudicate the case. 5.2 That aggrieved by the order he prefer this appeal. That he has no source of income to make pre-deposit and he is struggling for survival and hence the Hon'ble Commissioner of Customs (Appeal) consider his financial hardship. 5.3 That the impugned order does not contain the preamble. So, he was not known that where appeal has to b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t that the passenger failed to produce any documentary evidence for the purchase value of the impugned goods, whatever documents produced by the applicant in support of his claim for the value, bear the different models of the impugned electronic goods. Hence Department was compelled to resort to market survey and arrived at assessable value by deducting permissible deductions from the market price of the impugned goods. Therefore, request to grant 40% abatement in lieu of permissible deductions for calculating duty would be contrary to the law and should not be allowed. 11. Upon perusal of the case records available on the case file, Government observes that the applicant attempted to walk through green channel and was intercepted by Customs officer on his way. On being asked by the officer about contents of his baggage, he replied that it contains few electronic goods and Samsung slim TV of 55"(8-series). On verification of his Customs Declaration Card, the officer found that the passenger has not fulfilled the value column and left it blank. On suspicion detailed examination of his baggage was conducted and the goods commercial in nature as per details menti....