TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (10) TMI 182
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....und were noticed to be 111 nos. incomplete engine blocks, 50% of which could be reused after reconditioning, 51 nos. were found to be used diesel engines, and some very old Bonnet Coverings were found in the consignment, which were treated as scrap. The engine blocks in reusable conditions were assessed to a value of 10,000 each and a scrap of Rs. 10/- per kg. The Commissioner (Appeals) after considering the appellant's request to fix the value of the scrap at par with the contemporaneous import of scrap and the value of the engine blocks should be fixed legalistically, and came to a conclusion that the value of contemporaneous imports of comparable goods to be ranging from Rs. 7,000 to Rs. 18,000 and valuation of the consignment as per Rul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e in this case i.e. the price is the sole consideration, the value is the price at the time of place of importation and the buyer and seller have no interest in the business of each other. (b) No reasons have been assigned for not accepting the invoice value as transaction value as contemplated under Rule 3 of CVR. (c) No comparison, as attempted by the original authority and appellate authority is possible as comparison is relevant only in the case of identical or similar goods. Here, the goods compared are certainly not identical or similar. The basis adopted both at the original and appellate stages is not correct. (d) No doubt at the appellate stage certain....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....after clearance, disassembly, sorting out etc. (h) As per the findings of the department the goods imported are not engines, but only certain parts assembly which could, in part be reused after repairs etc. When the basic characteristics of the engine are not there, even to call them incomplete engines would be wrong. These are at best parts assembly which are permissible for imports. The provisions under Section 111(d) would accordingly be applicable. (i) The following decisions are cited to in support of the above : (1) 1993 (113) E.L.T. 487 (Tribunal) Hind Printing Works v. Commissioner of Customs. Second Hand Ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed and therefore the claim of the appellants to be assessed under Rule 3 of the Customs Value Rules i.e. Transaction Value is not called for, since there was a misdeclaration found of description and value in as much as incomplete and complete used automobile diesel engines were found and not used automobile parts (scrap) as declared and the value declared was only Rs. 1,26,645/-. 4. We have considered the submissions made by both sides and the material on record. We find :- (a) From the paper book that a submission is made that while fixing the quantum of fine and penalty no effort was seen to have been made to find out the margin of profit for goods as well as no effort was seen to have been made to find out the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the value of comparable goods of NISSAN make from Contemporaneous Bills of Entry, as found in this case. We also find that the Tribunal in the case of CC, Delhi v. Blue Star Enterprises [1996 (81) E.L.T. 287 (Tribunal)] had an occasion to examine that the authority has a duty to cause enquiries to be made to find out whether there is an international trade in the particular kind of goods imported and the price of such goods sold or offered for sale for delivery at the relevant time. Whether there is an international trade in relation to a particular kind of goods and whether any such price contemplated in Section 14(1) can be found is a question of fact. And in the present case, we find that the Commissioner has found that there were import....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....therefore rejected. (h) We therefore find that the confiscation and penalty is called for. We appreciate the plea in the paper book that no market price and margin of proper determination were not indicated in the order. We find that the redemption find as reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals) is almost 98% of the value determined. The Tribunal in appeal against the Order No. S/10/18/97VA dated May 14, 1997 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai, which the appellants here relied upon, as regards valuation, had reduced the redemption fine to level of 100% of assessable value from the levels imposed by the Commissioner. The Tribunal did not consider any reduction in the penalty imposed [refer Shree Ram Enterpri....