TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 738
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ms whereby the Commissioner has re-determined the value of the goods declared as USD 27,520 at 1,60,14,576 CIF and ordered confiscation of the same under Section 111(d) & (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and allowed the redemption of the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 3,00,000/- and duty at appropriate rates. Learned Commissioner has also imposed penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- on the importer under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Revenue has also filed the appeal on the ground that the redemption fine and penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Customs is less than even 10% of the reassessed value of Rs. 1,60,14,576/- and has prayed for enhancing the redemption fine and the penalty. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Bill of Entry No. 240130 dated 05.02.2009. Thereafter, Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the Chairman of the appellant on 13.03.2009. Since there was a delay in releasing the aircrafts and the appellant was suffering huge demurrage charge, the appellant requested the respondent to allow provisional release of the goods but the same was not done. Thereafter, the appellant approached the High Court of Kerala and the Hon'ble High Court vide its judgment dated 24.03.2009 directed Customs Authorities to allow provisional release of the goods within one week and as per the Order of the High Court, respondent allowed provisional release of the goods on payment of Customs duty and also took Bank Guarantee and Bond from the appellant.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1,60,14,576/- is not sustainable in law. He further submitted that the Adjudicating Authority has failed to appreciate the fact that the aircraft was junk and unworthy but useful for the school of AME studies purpose only and there were not enough avionic equipments. He further submitted that adopting value of such goods based on the value of other aircrafts allegedly imported through JNPT, Nhava Sheva without furnishing details of such import is against Customs Valuation Rules. He further submitted that the value of contemporaneous import to assess Customs duty cannot be adopted since said import was made under Risk Management System without examination and on NIL rate of Customs duty. He has also submitted that the redemption fine and the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m the Department of Civil Aviation and after getting a license from DGFT. The Department has re-determined the value only on the basis of alleged contemporaneous import through Nhava Sheva where the value was determined at Rs. 87,35,238/-. Further, we find that at the time of making the statement, the Chairman of the Institute produced original invoice No.1709 dated 11.10.2008 from M/s J&S Aviation showing total value of the goods at USD 201025 equivalent to Rs. 98,90,438/-. Further, we find that the Adjudicating Authority has admitted that there is a difference in the year of manufacture of the aircraft imported in Nhava Sheva compares to the aircraft imported by the appellant. Further, the appellant submitted that identical aircraft impor....