D.A. SRINIVASULU Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the Order -in -Original No. 85/2003/CAC/CC/A.H. dated 28 -10 -2003, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are as follows: - The appellant, Shri D.A. Srinivasulu purchased a Toyota Land Cruiser Prado vehicle from an importer, Shri Iqbal Shaik Bapu for certain consideration. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) conducted certain investigations which revealed that at the time of import of the vehicle, there was mis -declaration of the model, age, usage and value of the vehicle with a view to overcome import restrictions and to evade applicable duty. The vehicle was declared to be of 1990 make with a value of Rs. 1,00,000/ -. The importer cleared the vehicle in terms of ITC Public Notice No. 3/97 -02 under Category A on payment of Rs. 3,20,084/ - as duty on the appraised value of Rs. 3,23,391/ -. Later the importer registered the vehicle with RTO, Bangalore. At the time of registration, he declared the year of manufacture as 1996 under cubic capacity as 2500. Subsequently, he sold the vehicle to the appellant for Rs. 20,00,000/ -. The DRI investigation revealed that the impugned vehicle was 1997 make and CIF value of the car is Rs. 11,44,586/ -. Therefore the vehicle could not have been in possession and use of the importer in the foreign country for at least one year since it was shipped into India on 9 -8 -97. Under such circumstances, there is violation of ITC Public Notice mentioned above. One of the conditions is that the vehicle should have been in possession of the importer for a period of at least one year. In view of the above violation and the misdeclaration of value, the vehicle was liable for confiscation under the Customs Act. The vehicle was seized from the appellant who deposited a sum of Rs. 9,00,000/ - being the duty difference. The said vehicle was handed over to the appellant for safe custody. The importer, Shri Iqbal Shaik Bapu could not be traced out by the DRI. The Revenue proceeded against the appellant with regard to the illicit import of the car. Total duty was assessed at Rs. 13,34,015/ -. After taking into account, the duty already paid and the deposit of Rs. 9,00,000/ - made by the appellant, the balance amount of Rs. 1,13,931/ - was demanded. The vehicle was held liable for confiscation in terms of Section 111(d), (m) and (o) of the Customs Act, 1962. An option to redeem the vehicle on payment of fine of Rs. 5,00,000/ - was imposed. The appellant, Shri Srinivasulu strongly challenged the impugned order. Hence he has come before the Tribunal for relief.

(3.) SHRI Laxmi Narayan, the learned Advocate appeared for the appellant and Shri Ganesh Havanur, the learned SDR appeared on behalf of the Revenue. The learned Advocate made the following submissions : -