Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
M/S. Margra Indus. Ltd. vs C.C., New Delhi on 30 April, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2001(76)ECC786
ORDER
S.S. Kang
1. The appellants filed these appeals against the common order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).
2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants made import of rough marble blocks and filed a bill of entry declaring the value as 90 US Dollars PMT. The adjudicating authority held that the goods, in question, require a license and also enhanced the value of goods from 90 US Dollars to 115 US Dollars PMT and conficasted the goods and allowed the redemption of the goods on payment of redemption fine and personal penalty was also imposed on the appellants. Against the adjudication order, the appellants filed an appeal and the Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, remanded the issue of valuation to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication with the direction to supply the copies of the documents on the basis of which the value of the goods was enhanced. The Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, however, upheld the order in respect of confiscation, redemption fine and imposition of personal penalty.
3. Ld. Counsel, submits that the issue in respect of valuation of the goods, in question, is remanded to the adjudicating authority and the issue of redemption fine and personal penalty is related to the valuation of the goods and quantum of redemption of fine and penalty based on the value of the goods. Therefore, up-holding of redemption fine and penalty by the Commissioner, is not justified, in view of the fact that the issue of valuation is remanded for de novo adjudication.
4. Heard Ld. D.R., who reiterates the findings of the lower authorities.
5. In this case, the issue in respect of valuation of the goods has been remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo adjudication, therefore, the issue in respect of redemption fine and personal penalty is directly associated with the value of the goods also requires reconsideration. Therefore, the order, passed by the commissioner (Appeals), up-holding the imposition of redemption fine and personal penalty, is set aside and the matter in respect of redemption fine and personal penalty is remanded to the adjudicating authority to be decided alongwith the issue of valuation, which is already remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals). The adjudicating authority will decide these issues afresh after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants. The appeals are disposed of as indicated above. (Dictated in Court).