TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 601
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e been filed by M/s. VGS Enterprises [the importer] Shri Arun Gupta [Arun] and Shri Vaibhav Gupta [Vaibhav] to assail the order-in-appeal No. CC(A)/CUS/D-II/IMPORT/ICD/ TKD/33-35/2023-24 dated 19.04.2023 [impugned order] passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in which he upheld the order dated 20.06.2019 passed by the Joint Commissioner confirming the proposals made in the show cause notice dated 08.09.2015 issued by the Deputy Director, Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence [DRI] and rejected the appeals of the appellant. 2. We have heard Shri Sunil Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Rajesh Singh, learned authorised representative for the Revenue and perused the records. 3. The undisputed facts of the case a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. Further, it alleged that the importer, Arun and Vaibhav were liable to penalties. 6. The proposals in the SCN were confirmed by the Joint Commissioner the operative part of which is as follows: "In view of above I pass the following order : FOR THE IMPORTRS MADE THORUGH ICD (IMP), TUGHLAKABAD, NEW DELHI (i) I order rejection of the unit price i.e. USD 620 per MT, on which the seized goods were imported by M/s VGS Enterprises, in terms of Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007, and re-determine the same as indicated in S. No. 3 to 5 of Table IV given above (para 18) in terms of Rule 4; (ii) I order confiscation of the goods (123.921 MT imported vide BO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (vii) I impose a penalty of Rs. 36,673/- (Rupees Thirty Six Thousand Six Hundred Seventy Three only) on Shri Vaibhav Gupta and Shri Arun Gupta, Partner of M/s VGS Enterprises under section 112(a) and Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakh only) under section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, on each of them. FOR IMPORTS MADE THROUGH JNPT, NHAVA SHEVA, MUMBAI (i) I order rejection of the unit price i.e. USD 620 per MT, on which the seized goods were imported by them in terms of Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007, and re-determined the same as indicated in S. No. 1 and 2 of the Table V (para-18), in terms of Rule 4 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of value of Im....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....usand Nine Hundred Twenty Five only) each on Shri Vaibhav Gupta and Shri Arun Gupta, Partner of M/s VGS Enterprises under section 112 (a) and Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh only) under section 114AA of the customs Act, 1962, on each of them". 7. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the above in the impugned order. 8. The submission of Shri Sunil Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants is that there was no mis-declaration in the Bill of Entry at all because the imported goods were 'painted steel sheets' and the fact that they also had a zinc coating would make no difference. According to the learned counsel the goods were described in the Bill of Entry as per the invoice and the importer had also produced the MRC which gives the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act but were allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine under section 125 of the Act. Since there was mis-declaration, penalties under sections 112 and 114AA of the Act on the importer and its Directors Arun and Vaibhav need to be upheld. 11. On the question of re-determination of value, Shri Rajesh Singh submitted that the values were re-determined on the basis of values of contemporaneous imports under Rule 4 after choosing the most appropriate Bills of Entry for the purpose of re-determination of value. He further submits that the Bills of Entry pertain to 2015 and copies of the documents sought by the appellant may not have been readily available but nevertheless the actual value in the Bills of Entry was taken from the National Impo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntry, the description may not give all the details necessary to assess- are they Men's Shirts, Women's shirts, Children's shirts, are they made of cotton, polyester or silk, etc. The value can vary greatly based on these details. In such cases, the proper officer calls for further information through the Customs EDI system and assesses the Bills of Entry. 15. We, therefore, find that there was no misdeclaration of the nature of the goods in the Bills of Entry and consequently, the confiscation, redemption fine and penalties cannot be sustained and need to be set aside. 16. Even if the goods are not mis-declared, the declared value can be rejected under Valuation Rule 12 and redetermined under Valuation Rules 4 through 9. The reasons f....