Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commr. Of Customs(Port), Kolkata vs Bhawani Enterprises on 20 March, 2017
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
Customs Appeal Nos. 75224, 75562 to 75573/2014
(Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. 228-241/CUS (Apprg.)/KOL (P)/2013 dated-28/10/2013 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Kolkata)
Commr. of Customs(Port), Kolkata
Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)
Vs.
Bhawani Enterprises
Respondent (s)
Appearance:
Sri Dasgupta, D.C. (A.R.) for the Appellant (s) NONE for the Respondent (s) CORAM:
HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE (DR.) SATISH CHANDRA, PRESIDENT HONBLE SHRI DEVENDER SINGH, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Date of Hearing :20/03/2017 Date of Pronouncement :20/03/2017 ORDER NO FO/75396-75408/17 Per Shri Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra All the appeals have been filed by the Department against the Order-in-Appeal No.228-241/CUS(Apprg.)/KOL(P)/2013 dated-28/10/2013. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent assesses have imported Old and used Digital Multifunction Printer against the 14 Nos,. of Bill of Entry. The said imported goods were 100% examined in the presence of Customs officers, Chartered Engineer and representative of the respondents and found to be Old and used having residual life of more than six years and said Machines were found have undergone minor reconditioning and value was assessed on enhanced value against declared value. The value of the goods was enhanced on the basis of the Govt. approved Chartered Engineers Certificate The same was accepted by both the parties but the Commissioner (Appeal) by its impugned order has set aside the order of confiscation, holding that it is not a case of mis-declaration attracting the provision of 111(m) of Customs Act, 1962. Being aggrieved, the Department has filed this appeal.
2. With this background, we have heard Shri Dasgupta, D.C. (A.R.) for the Department and none appeared for respondent assesse.
3. After hearing the Ld. Counsel for the Department and on perusal of the case record, we find, that on the licensing aspect, the Commissioner (Appeals) has followed the order of Honble Madras High Court in the writ petition No. 890 to 894, 949 to 961 and 1170 to 1188 of 2012 dated-14/03/2013 wherein it was held that upto 28/02/2013, there was no restriction on import of subject goods. Enquiring from the office of the DGFT, it was informed that in consultation with Law Ministry, they had decided not to file SLP against the said judgment of the Madras High Court. As for the question of confiscation of the goods for mis-declaration of value, we find that the appellants had declared the goods correctly in description /quantity/value and classified them under proper chapter heading of Customs Tariff. The value of the goods was enhanced on the basis of the Chartered Engineers certificate which was accepted by both the parties. We agree with Commissioner (Appeal)s findings that (i) mere enhancement of value on the basis of C.E. certificate cannot be a ground for treating declared value as mis-declared unless there is other corroborative evidence. (ii) except enhancement on the basis of C.E.s Certificate, there is no other material on record to inform that declared value was mis-declared.
4. In view of above, we find no reason to set aside the impugned order and the same is sustained. In the result, all the appeals filed by the Department are dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
Sd/- Sd/-
(SHRI DEVENDER SINGH) (JUSTICE DR. SATISH CHANDRA)
TECHNICAL MEMBER PRESIDENT
k.b/-
Customs Appeal Nos. 75224, 75562 to 75573/2014
3