2025 (8) TMI 871

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....elting Scrap" as classified by importer, thereby making Appellant pay duty difference upon reassessment alongwith imposition of redemption fine of Rs.3,00,000/- and penalty of Rs.50,000/- by the Adjudicating Authority that received approval of the Commissioner (Appeals) is assailed before this forum by the Appellant-importer. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, is that Appellant had filed Bill of Entry No. 9107499 on dated 23.01.2013 through its CHA for clearance of its imported consignment namely "Heavy Melting Scrap" imported from UAE and declare its value as Rs.19,42,688/- on which duty leviable was Rs.3,27,429/- calculated basis unit value at US $380 PMT and total weight of goods was declared as 83,810 Kgs. It was 100% examined by Docks ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aw that goods are required to be assessed, in the manner in which they are presented, judging about its future speculative use by the Docks Officer would be a decision taken under presumption since no process is suggested by the Department by which rusted and corroded iron pipes can be prepared for re-use after limited servicing done on the imported goods. She further submitted that weight was found to be 455 Kgs. in excess which is 0.54% of the weight mentioned in the Bill of Entry, that was negligible difference and attributable to weight taken at two different places in two different weighing machines and higher weight would fetch higher revenue for the Department, since value of goods have been determined on the basis of weight alone, f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... said that both category of materials can be further used after reprocessing or re-servicing but that would not determine the value of goods for the reason that in its present form it is not useable, for which it is categorised as scrap and the value of scrap of those material/item is required to be taken for valuation purpose and not for its futuristic use. This being so, it is not understood as to why Respondent- Department has suggested to increase its value from US $380 PMT to US $620 PMT, which as per adjudication order is based on contemporary import but no reference is given in its order as to which consignment had declared the value of similar item as US $620 PMT, and Appellant was not provided with a copy of such contemporary valua....