TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 744
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vide Bill of Entry No. 28341 dated 27.05.1998. The value of the goods which were imported from Singapore was declared by the appellant @ Singapore $21,000. The appellants also produced a foreign Chartered Engineer's Certificate certifying the value of the goods as Singapore $ 21,000 and the price of an equivalent new machine @ Singapore $ 60,000. An enquiry was made by the Revenue to M/s. Noritsu, Singapore, with regard to the price of the said goods and vide letter dated 21.10.1997, it was informed that the price of new QSS1702 V printer processor as Singapore $ 1,47,500 in 1991. The price of film processor was not furnished but the price of accessories were given. Basing on this letter, the original authority observed that the value o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... would depend on up keep and maintenance of such goods. As per the direction of the Tribunal to grant depreciation basing on the Board's Circular, the value was arrived at Rs. 14,58,673/- and the duty payable was assessed @ Rs. 10,37,116.50. 4. Aggrieved, the appellants filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the same. Thus, the appellants are now before the Tribunal. 5. On behalf of the appellant Shri Prem Ranjan Kumar, Advocate, reiterated the grounds of appeal and made the following submissions. (a) He submitted that the appellants had furnished a foreign Chartered Engineer's Certificate with regard to identical goods. The same has been rejected by the authorities below stating that the date of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncorrect. 6. Against this, the Ld. AR Shri B. Balamurugan, AC, on behalf of the Revenue reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He argued that the Tribunal while remanding the matter had only directed to take into consideration, the plea of the appellant with regard to the value of the goods imported by M/s. Agra Colour Lab and also to grant depreciation as per Board Circular. The adjudicating authority followed this direction but had rejected the value of the goods imported by M/s. Agra Colour Lab, for the reason that being secondhand goods, the value may be different basing upon the up keep and maintenance of the goods and therefore cannot be compared. The company at Singapore had provided the value of the goods to be S$1,47,500....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng that there is a discrepancy in the date. With regard to the reason for rejection of Foreign Chartered Engineer's Certificate, we, however, find that the appellant has been able to give plausible explanation to the difference in the dates. It is submitted by the appellant that the inspection of the goods was done by the foreign Chartered Engineer basing upon the proforma invoices and later the certificate was issued after issue of the supplier's invoice. The appellant has adopted and declared the value as given by the foreign Chartered Engineer. Further, his request to the department to inspect the goods by a local Chartered Engineer has not been acceded to by the Department. It is proved that the similar identical goods have been....