Directorate General of Valuation Central Board of Excise & Customs Government of India

CESTAT Order No. 770/2004-NB(A) dt....

CESTAT Order No. 770/2004-NB(A) dt. 29.7.2004

2004 (65) RLT 801 (CESTAT-Del.)

(In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi)

Present : Shri S.S. Kang, Member (Judicial)
Shri V.K.Agarwal, Member (Technical)

PAB (I)PVT.LTD.

Versus

CC,MEERUT

(final Order No. 770/2004-NB(A) dt. 29.7.2004 certified on 5.8.2004 in Appeal No. C/480/2003-Nb(A))

Assessable value – Section 14 of Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 5(3) and 8 of Customs Valuation (DPIG) Rules, 1988 – if more than one value of goods is found, lowest of such value has to be used to determine value of imported goods. (Para 5)

Assessable value-Section 14 of Customs Act,1962 and Rule 5 of Customs Valuation (DPIG) Rules,1988-Contemporaneous import-in absence of details of quantity etc. in respect of contemporaneous import matter regarding valuation off cuts/side cuts remanded for redetermination of value thereof.

Confiscation and Penalty –Section 111 and 112 of Customs Act, 1962 –Misdeclaration – imported goods are used in manufacture of sophisticated electronic PCPs, therefore cannot be of inferior grade-rejection of declared value upheld – misdeclaration of quality established –fine and penalty reduced. (Para 6)

Appearances : Shri L.P.Asthana, Adv.for Appellants
Shri S.M.Tata, SDR for Respondents

Cases Referred :

1. CEGAT’s Final Order No. 373/2002-A dt. 14.8.2002 (Para 2,5,6)

Per V.K.Agrawal :

The issue involved in this Appeal filed by M/s. PAB (I) Pvt. Ltd. relates to enhancement of the assessable value of the goods imported by them under the Customs Act.

2. Shri.L.P Asthana, learned Advocate, submitted that Appellants imported goods under Bill of entry dated 26.12.2000 describing the goods as Copper clad laminates (I) side cut, off cuts and rejected and (2) grade ‘C’ sheets; that the value declared by them was 0.4 US $ per Kg. in respect of side cuts, off cuts and rejects and 0.75 US$ per Kg. in respect of grade ‘C’ sheets; that the Commissioner under Order-in-Original under NO. 48/2001 dated 6.11.2001 had held that the grade ‘C’ sheets were actually virgin prime sheets and that similarly side cuts etc. were actually strips cut from virgin sheets of copper clad laminates, that the Commissioner determined the value of the sheets to be US$ 95.75 per sheet and that of strips US $ 750 per MT; that on Appeal filed by them, the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 373/2002-A dated 14.8.2002 has held that the Commissioner’s order “ rejecting the declared value for imported goods misdeclared as ‘C’ grade and rejects can not be questioned. However, there is force in the contention of the Advocate for the Appellants that the goods imported by them requires to be inspected in their presence to ascertain the thickness of the sheets which are less than thickness of sheets usually imported .” The Tribunal, therefore, remanded the matter for determination of value of the imported goods after allowing inspection of the goods in question in the presence of the appellants and after disclosing the basis of valuation and after hearing the appeals on the issue of valuation. The adjudicating officer may also redetermined fine and penalty imposed on the basis of fresh determination of value. The learned Advocate, further, mentioned that under the impugned order the Commissioner has determined the assessable value at US $ 9.75 per sheet and US $ 750 per MT in respect of off cuts/ strips; that the Commissioner has also imposed a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs under Section 112 of the Customs Act and confiscated 2000 sheets of copper clad laminate and strips with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs. 4.5 lakhs.

…………….

5. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. We observe from the Tribunal’s earlier Final Order No. 373/2002-A dated 14.8.2002 that the Tribunal had decided the matter regarding the quality of the impugned goods after perusing the Chartered Engineers Certificate dated 18.1.2002. It was held by the Tribunal in the said Final Order that “In view of the fact that the imported goods are used in manufacture of sophisticated electronic PCBs, the material in question can not be of inferior grade and the same has been certified as prime goods by the Chartered Engineer. As such, the impugned order rejecting the declared value for imported goods, mis-declared as C grade and rejects, can not be questioned”. In view of this factual findings which has not been challenged by the appellants the goods imported by them are not as per their declaration on the Bill of Entry, As the goods of prime quality, the transactional value declared by them can also not be accepted under Rule 4 of the Customs Valuation Rules. As rightly pointed out by the learned Senior Departmental Representative, the value can not be determined on the basis of market rates as given by the Chartered Engineers in his report in view of the provisions of the Customs Valuation Rules. Therefore, the value can not be determined as per deductive method also. The Commissioner, under the impugned Order has referred to the data of value received from ICD Tuglakabad according to which the price ranges between US $ 5.9 and US $ 9.75 per sheet. We agree with the learned Advocate that in view of the price varying between 5.9. to 9.75 US $ the Commissioner can not determine the value of the impugned goods at the highest rate i.e. US $ 9.75 MT. In absence of any other data, we are of opinion that the value of prime quality sheet has to be determined on the basis of lowest price range i.e. US $ 5.9 per sheet. As far as the enhancement of the value of off cuts / side cuts is concerned, we find that the Adjudicating, Authority has referred to some bill of entry No. 231482 dated 19.9.2000 under which Copper clad strips of cut pieces were imported at the rate of US $ 7.50 per MT. However, no further details are available as to the quantity etc. imported under the said Bill of Entry. In absence of any details, we are unable to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the enhancement of the value made by the Commissioner is correct or not under the law. We, therefore, remand the matter as far as the valuation of the cuts / side cuts is involved with the direction to the Commissioner to redetermine the value of these goods after informing the Appellants the basis for enhancement of the assessable value and after affording, reasonable opportunity of hearing.

6. In view of the finding of the Tribunal in the earlier Final Order No. 373/2002-A, the goods were mis-declared by the Appellants and as such, they are liable for confiscation. However, we agree with the learned Advocate that the redemption fine imposed under the impugned order is on the higher side which we reduce to Rs.2 lakhs. We also reduce the amount of penalty to Rs. 2.5 lakhs.

Company Name and Address: 
( PAB (I)PVT.LTD. Vs CC,MEERUT )