COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) Vs. MINI MAX OVERSEAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal filed by the department, the challenge is against the acceptance of the declared value of the subject -goods as also against the reduction of quanta of redemption fine and penalty. The Appellant is represented by the JDR. There is no representation for the Respondent despite notice, nor any request for adjournment.

(2.) AFTER examining the records and hearing the learned JDR, we have not found any case for the Appellant. The subject -goods are 1000 units of old and used monitors, 875 of them analog monitors and 125 digital monitors. The Respondent had declared unit value of US$ 12.50 in the relevant bill of entry dated 9.8.2002. They had not produced specific import licence for clearance of the goods. The original authority held the goods liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act in the absence of import licence. It imposed a fine of Rs. 3.5. lakhs to redeem the goods. A penalty of Rs. 50,000/ - was imposed on the importer under Section 112 (a) of the Act. As regards the value of the goods, the adjudicating authority enhanced the unit price to US$ 16 for analog monitors and to US$ 19 for digital monitors. This enhancement was done on the basis of certain report of 'Docks Examiners'. Aggrieved by the order of the adjudicating authority, the Assessee preferred an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) and the latter, having found no reliable basis for enhancement of the value of the goods, set it aside and accepted the declared value. Further, after considering evidence produced by the Assessee regarding 'margin of profit', the appellate authority reduced the quantum of fine from Rs. 3.5 lakhs to Rs. 1.25 lakhs. The quantum of penalty was proportionately reduced from Rs. 50,000/ - (Rupees fifty thousand only) to Rs. 25,000/ - (Rupees twenty five thousand only). The present appeal of the department is against the appellate Commissioner's decision.

(3.) IN the result, the appeal of the Revenue gets dismissed.