2026 (4) TMI 1842

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2008 from UK claiming the benefit of notification no.21/2002 of Customs dated 01.03.2002 declaring that same is a new a car and cleared the same on payment of concessional rate of duty. The car was sold to the father of the appellant before me. Later on, an investigation was conducted and it was alleged against the importer that the importer had mis-declared the car as new one which was old one as it was registered with United Kingdom authorities in the month of May, 2008. Therefore, the car was the old car. Consequently, benefit of Notification no. 21/2002 of Customs dated 01.03.2002 cannot be extended to the importer. Consequently, during investigation, the car was confiscated from the father of the appellant, and, thereafter a show cause....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....presentative supported the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides. 6. It is a case of import of new car on 30.05.2008 by availing benefits under Notification No. 21/2002 Customs dated 01.03.2002 for payment of concessional rate of duty. During the investigation it was found that as the car in question was registered with the United Kingdom Authorities, therefore, it is alleged that it is an old car and benefit of notification cannot be given to the importer, therefore, proceedings will be initiated against the importer as well the father of the appellant who was the bona fide buyer of the car, and redemption fine has been imposed on the car. In show cause notice it has been admitted that the car in question was manufactured in April 2008....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n UK roads prior to export. This clearly indicates that the vehicle is registered only for export purposes. Therefore, in terms of Board's Circular No. 1/2005, dated 11-1-2005, the vehicle is a new one. Accordingly, it is held that vehicle is a new car. We have seen in this matter that the learned Jt. CDR is himself is an adjudicating authority. The Jt. CDR is an officer of the Court and he has to assist the Court being the officer of the Court. During the course of argument, the learned Jt. CDR could not give the proper answer to the queries regarding the registration document, it means he was defending his own order without performing the duties of the officer of the Court, which cannot be appreciated. Therefore, the Central Board of ....