Whether differential customs duty payable on excess quantity of imported goods received without impacting transaction value?

PJ/Case Law/2013-14/2084

Case:-COMMR. OF CUS., VISAKHAPATNAM VERSUS REGAL PLYWOOD INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.

Citation:-2014 (299) E.L.T. 492 (Tri.-Bang.)

Brief facts:- Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order for non-confiscation of the goods imported by the respondents and also for not demanding the duty. The facts of the case are that the respondents imported Malaysian Round Logs and filed bill of entry on 21-4-2005. On verification of the goods it was found that there was excess quantity of goods around 288CBM. Therefore the goods were seized and issued show cause notice to the respondents. Adjudication took place. The learned Commissioner observed that as respondent has not paid over and above the transaction value to their foreign supplier, therefore the transaction value declared by the respondent was accepted and no duty was asked for excess quantity of the said goods found in the consignments. He also held that as differential duty for the excess quantity of goods is only Rs. 1.25 lakhs as the volume of goods imported is worth Rs. 1.60 crores. Therefore, he did not confiscate the goods. He imposed the penalty on the respondents. Aggrieved from the said order, Revenue is in appeal for demand of differential duty on excess quantity of goods imported and for confiscation of the impugned goods.

Reasoning of judgment:- Having heard the case it is concluded that the appellant has failed to prove that the respondent has paid any amount over and above the transaction value. Therefore, although there is an excess quantity of the goods but transaction value is not affected, therefore that transaction value is accepted. Accordingly question of demand of differential duty does not arise. Further, we find that as quantity of goods have been misdeclared by the respondents, therefore goods are liable for confiscation. As in the impugned order the learned Commissioner did not confiscate the goods, we hold that goods are liable for confiscation. Therefore, the impugned goods are confiscated. As goods are not prohibited goods, therefore, they are allowed to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine. As the goods have been cleared after adjudication, therefore they direct the respondent to pay the redemption fine of Rs. 10,000/- with this terms appeal is disposed off.

Decision:- Appeal disposed off.

Comment:- The gist of the case is that although there may be misdeclaration as regards quantity of goods imported but as far as it is established that the transaction value has not been affected and no payment over and above the transaction value was paid, the differential customs duty cannot be demanded. However, the goods are liable for confiscation as there was mis-declaration.

Comments

PJ/Case Law/2013-14/2084

Post a Comment

Query