TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 285
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... out of the impugned common Order-In-Appeal, both the appeals are taken up together for hearing and disposal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Appellant imported consignment of Computer Cabinet Cases vide 03(three) Bills of Entry viz. No.6842977 dated 23.11.2024, Bill of Entry No.7103875 dated 07.12.2024 & Bill of Entry No.7470384 dated 26.12.2024. 4. On examination by the officers on 09.12.2024, 10.12.2024 and 27.01.2025, it was found that the said consignment consisted of components such as motherboards, power supplies, cooling fans, heat sinks, original computer cases (cabinets) of brand viz. H.P., Dell, and Lenovo, wiring and other components except RAM, Hard Disk and Processor. The aforesaid goods also had branding labels ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e examination and the Chartered Engineer's Certificate it appeared to the Revenue that the importer had mis-declared and undervalued the goods. However, it was found that there is no violation of Waste Management Rules. The Appellant waved the issuance of Show Cause Notice. The Adjudicating Authority vide the impugned orders dated 08.04.2025 & 26.06.2025 passed the following order:- 1. Impugned Order dated 08.04.2025 with respect of BoE's. i.e. 6842977 dated 23.11.2024 & 7103875 dated 07.12.2024: -rejected the declared description of goods as Barebone System without Hard Disk & RAM for Data Processing Machines" and order to amend the description of goods as "Old & Used Barebone System without Hard Disk & RAM for Data Processing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, for knowingly making false declarations and misrepresenting material particulars, particularly relating to the value and condition of the goods, with the intent to evade customs duty and circumvent the policy conditions. ordered to re-assess the Bills of Entry No. 1) 6842977 dated 23.11.2024 and 7103875 dated 07.12.2024 under section 17 (4) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Impugned Order dated 06.06.2025 with respect of BoE No.7470384 dated 26.12.2024: rejected the declared description of goods as Barebone System without Hard Disk & RAM for Data Processing Machines" and order to amend the description of goods as "Old & Used Barebone System without Hard Disk & RAM for Data Pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. Imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,20,000/- on the appellant under Section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 for their acts of omission/commission rendering the impugned goods liable to confiscation under Section 111(m) and 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962. also imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- under Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, for knowingly making false declarations and misrepresenting material particulars, particularly relating to the value and condition of the goods, with the intent to evade customs duty and circumvent the policy conditions. ordered to re-assess the BOE No. 7470384 dated 26.12.2024 under section 17 (4) of the Customs Act, 1962. 8. On....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... re-determined duty liability amount from Rs. 11,78,007/-(declared duty liability) to Rs. 51,04,438/- vide impugned order dated 08.04.2025 and the assessable value of consignment from Rs. 26,71,326/- (@ USD 7.00 per unit x 4440) to Rs. 95,40,450/- (@ USD 25.00 per unit x 4440) and the re-determined duty liability amount from Rs. 4,80,838/- (declared duty liability) to Rs. 17,17,281/- vide impugned order dated 03.09.2025." Hence, the present appeals before the Tribunal. 9. It is the case of the Appellant that they have waived the issuance of Show Cause Notice in order to avoid detention and demurrage charges and as such it cannot be construed that the Appellant has accepted the contention of the department and that they have forgone th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reiterates the finding recorded in the impugned order and prays that the appeal filed by the Appellant being devoid of any merits may be dismissed. 12. Heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. 13. The brief issue that requires consideration in the instant appeals is whether there is mis-declaration of the quantity and value by the Appellant. We find that the importer has declared the value at USD 7 per piece/ USD 4 per piece where the Revenue determined the same at the rate of USD 25 per piece as suggested by the Chartered Engineer. On going through the Chartered Engineer's Report, we find that the Chartered Engineer has indicated the value in casual manner without any supporting evidence. There is no evidence put forth b....