COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE Vs. H.M. LEISURE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVENUE has filed this appeal against the OIA No. 431/2003 -Cus., dated 15 -12 -2003 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Bangalore.

(2.) THE respondents imported 68 units of Video Games. The declared value was not acceptable to the Revenue. An independent Chartered Engineer was engaged to ascertain the value. On the basis of the value determined by the Chartered Engineer, proceedings were initiated to re -determine the value. The case came up before the CEGAT even in the year 2002. The CEGAT remanded the case to the original authority to determine the price and clearly indicate in his order as to how the values are being determined by him under the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988. Accordingly, the original authority determined the value on the basis of the Chartered Engineers valuation. He stated that the Chartered Engineers valuation is fair enough to be adopted for the purpose of calculation of duty. He has further stated that hence there is no reason for re -determination of correct assessable value in terms of the CEGAT order. The original authority confiscated the impugned goods under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. He gave an option to the respondent to redeem the said goods on payment of a fine of Rs. 3 lakhs under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. He imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/ - under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. The respondent approached the Commissioner (Appeals), who set aside the order of the original authority and allowed the appeal of the respondent. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is under challenge by the Revenue on the following grounds: -

(3.) THE learned Advocate who appeared for the respondents urged that the Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly held that in the absence of special circumstances particularised in Rule 4(2), there is no ground for rejecting the Transaction Value.