TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (11) TMI 210
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eard both sides. 3. Relevant facts, in brief, are as follows:- (a) The appellant company filed Bills of Entry dated 27-6-2002 and 4-10-2002 declaring the goods as 2-keto guluconic acid from China and the value as 1.83 US$ per kg. On testing the goods were found to be Ascorbic acid. In his statement dated 8-1-2003, the Managing Director of the appellant company admitted the mis-declaration of description and admitted the import of Ascorbic acid and claimed its value as 3 US$ per kg. and, in his further statement dated 20-6-2003 he claimed the value as 7.75 US$ per kg. on the ground that the potency of the imported consignment is only 40% and requires downward adjustment of quantity of goods imported to correspond to 100% of the potency....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2.47 US$ and 13.84 per US$ and, therefore, the price declared in the second statement namely, 12.5 US$ per kg. which is closer to NIDB prices should be adopted. Similarly in respect of Metronidazole the contemporaneous prices noticed are 4.6 US$ and 5.29 US$ which are different from the price declared in his first statement as US$ 4.5 per kg. and, therefore, the price given in his second statement as 7.5 US$ should be adopted. Similarly, in respect of absorbic acid the prevailing contemporaneous price is 3.5 kg. Since there is no indication about the potency of the goods imported, the same having been imported from the same country as that of impugned goods should be treated as 40% potency; downward adjustment of quantity of goods imported ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s confiscated from the appellant's premises and from the premises of Lachem India. Thus there is duplication of demand and, therefore, the original demand should be reduced accordingly. (c) Therefore, he prays that the value declared by the Managing Director in his second statement should be adopted for the purpose of demand of duty. As there is duplication of demand by demanding duty on confiscated goods, the original demand should be reduced accordingly. He also seeks setting aside of lump sum fine of Rs. 9 lakhs and limiting the redemption fine to Rs. 15 thousands in respect of goods seized from the appellant's premises. He also seeks reduction in penalties proportionately. 5. Learned DR made the following submissions:- (a) The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....declaration and intention to evade anti-dumping duties stand admitted. Therefore, the legality of demand of differential duty, liability to confiscation of the offending goods and liability to imposition of penalty are not in dispute. The dispute relates the value to be adopted and consequently the quantum of duty, redemption fine and penalty. 6.2 On the valuation, both sides are relying on the NIDB data to support the values sought to be adopted by them. In the facts of the present case, the relevance of NIDB data is limited as corroborative evidence only. It is not a case where the prices of the imported goods are determined by adopting the contemporaneous prices of imports as found in NIDB data. The Commercial invoices dated 28-5-2002....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent statement should he adopted. In fact, the subsequent invoice produced is for a quantity of 9.2 MT only. The request for downward revision of quantity based on the potency is rather strange one and not supported any evidence of commercial practice nor acceptable legally. The total amount mentioned in the invoice produced in this regard has to be considered as applicable to the total quantity of 23 MT of ascorbic acid. The price calculated on such basis is close the price of $3 per Kg disclosed by the Managing Director in his first statement and therefore, the same should be adopted. 6.5 The situations in respect of other two products are slightly different. It was claimed that as per NIDB data in respect of Trimethoprim the prices not....