TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 824
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....GR. VA)/2010(JNCH) /IMP-245 dated 13th September 2010] of Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-II upholding the redetermination of value to Rs. 37,05,816 by recourse to rule 9 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007, confiscation of the goods under section 111(d) of Customs Act, 1962 for not being in possession of valid licence for import as well as under section 111(m) of Customs Act, 192 for misdeclaration of value and imposition of penalty of Rs. 3,50,000 under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962, is under challenge. 2. It is submitted that the 'plate leveler' had been manufactured by M/s Stemco in 1942 and that it had been dismantled as it could not be used as such; he clarified that the goods ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ort of overseas chartered engineer which has estimated current value of scrap without taking into account the cost of disassembling of the machinery. He further contends that the reports indicate that the parts of the machinery are serviceable and can hardly be 'scrap' as claimed by the appellant. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Madras v. System & Components Pvt Ltd [2004 (165) ELT 136 (SC)] to submit that admitted facts do not have to be proved. It was also argued by him that the contraventions came to light after clearance and that, in such cases, as held by the Tribunal in Prasant Glass Works P Ltd v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta [1996 (87) ELT 518 (Tribunal)], it wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....laration disowned as in error. Usage after import is not a criterion for classification. Therefore, the goods merit assessment in accordance with the declaration. 7. The goods are admittedly of '1942 vintage' and it is seen that paragraph 2.31 of the Foreign Trade Policy restricts 'second hand goods other than capital goods' and, as it is not the case of customs authorities that these are not 'capital goods', the impugned goods would be freely importable. Consequently, confiscation under section 111(d) of Customs Act, 1962 lacks authority of law. 8. As far as valuation is concerned, recourse was had to rule 12 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 for rejecting the declared value on the admitted r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in India; (ii) the deductive value for identical goods or similar goods; (iii) the computed value for identical goods or similar goods: Provided that in applying the values used for comparison, due account shall be taken of demonstrated difference in commercial levels, quantity levels, adjustments in accordance with the provisions of rule 10 and cost incurred by the seller in sales in which he and the buyer are not related; (c) substitute values shall not be established under the provisions of clause (b) of this sub-rule.' of rule 3 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007, recourse to anything other than 'declared value' must be preceded by appropriate justification.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rted at or about the same time in comparable quantities in a comparable commercial transaction were assessed; (b) the sale involves an abnormal discount or abnormal reduction from the ordinary competitive price; (c) the sale involves special discounts limited to exclusive agents; (d) the misdeclaration of goods in parameters such as description, quality, quantity, country of origin, year of manufacture or production; (e) the non declaration of parameters such as brand, grade, specifications that have relevance to value; (f) the fraudulent or manipulated documents.' while '(2) At the request of an importer, the proper officer, shall intimate the importer in writing the grounds for doub....