Custom
TRT-2025-
Cestat New Delhi
Date:-11-11-22
In:-
Issue Favourable to Tax Payer ?:-
Order date – 11 November 2022
Facts –
- The Appellant, M/s. Bansal Marble Traders, is an importer of stones having Import Export Code. The appellant had imported “polished marble slab” classified under CTH 68022190 through their authorized representative, CHA M/s. Rajiv Chibber. The goods were imported from China through M/s. TBK Industry Company Ltd.
- The Shed Officers, on the basis of doubt, examined the goods and found that value declared was less than the said value and the goods were not declared as granite slabs that the officers considered the goods to be the restricted goods.
- No valid license was found available with the appellants for import of said restricted goods (granite slabs). Resultantly, the appellant was alleged to have intentionally mis-declared the goods by undervaluing the same with the sole intention to evade the payment of customs duty. Accordingly the goods were seized.
- Aggrieved appellant had filed an appeal.
Issue –
- Whether the granite slabs falls under restricted goods?
Order –
- The Tribunal relied on the decision of Ho’ble Apex Court in the case of Century Metal Recycling Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India reported in 2019 (367) ELT 3 (S.C.), wherein it was held that no doubt in terms of Rule 3 of Customs Valuation it is the transaction value of such goods i.e. the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to India for delivery at the time and place of importation or, as the case may be, for export from India for delivery at the time and place of exportation, where the buyer and seller of the goods are not related and price is the sole consideration for the same, which has to be accepted. This understanding of transaction value is subject to rule 12 of the Valuation Rules.
- The Tribunal observed that the appellant in his letter acknowledge that the shipment was imported while declaring the shipment of polished marble slabs (CTH) 68022190. There is sufficient acceptance that on 100% second time check by the competent officers that instead 1202.5 Sq. Mtr. of polished marble slabs only 140 Sq. Mtr. of polished marble slabs were found in the shipment. In addition, there were found granite slabs of 1470 Sq. Mtr. approx. quantity, which were not declared in the Bill of Entry.
- There is no denial to this fact that on appellan’s own waiver of Show Cause Notice that the proper officer had assessed the duty based upon the value of polished marble slabs declared by appellant himself and the minimum value of granite slabs as per DGFT Notification No. 28 & 29/2015 – 2020 dated 17/9/2016
- The appellant‟s contention that goods should be assessed as per the invoice even though imported goods were different from what was mentioned in the invoice cannot be accepted because the duty of customs under section 12 of Customs Act, 1962 is to be charged and the restrictions under section 11 of the Act or under any other law for the time being in force are as “the goods imported into India” and not as “the goods declared to be imported in the invoice”.
- It is also finds that in this case the goods were correctly assessed to duty and the prohibitions or restrictions on imports were applied as the goods actually imported as was found on examination of the goods.
- Hence the appeal is dismissed.
Download Case Law
