LAWS(CE)-2009-2-46

NOVA PETROCHEMICALS LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUS., AHMEDABAD

Decided On February 06, 2009
Nova Petrochemicals Ltd. Appellant
V/S
Commissioner Of Cus., Ahmedabad Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE this impugned order Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad has confiscated one second hand Teijin Seiki draw twister machine imported by the appellant from Korea with an option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 10 Lakh. He has also confirmed duty of Rs. 17.07 Lakh (approx.) against the said appellant along with imposition of penalty of Rs. 5 Lakh on M/s. Nova Petrochemicals and Rs. 5 Lakh on Shri Sunil Gupta, Director of Nova Petrochemicals, in terms of provisions of Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act.

(2.) AS per the facts on record, M/s. Nova Petrochemicals Limited is engaged in the manufacture of various types of Yarns and Textile goods. They imported one set of second hand draw twister machine from South Korea company M/s. Machine World, under their claim under Para 5.4 of the Hand book of Procedure (Vol -1), according to which, import of second hand capital goods, which is not 10 years old, is admissible without specific import license. The year of manufacture machine under import was declared by the appellant as 1992 and accompanied a Chartered Accountant certificate dated 13 -11 -2000, issued by one Mr. Yongkion, Chartered Engineer showing the date of manufacture of the machine as 1992.

(3.) HOWEVER , the Customs authorities entertained a view that machine was 10 years old and accordingly initiated investigations. The said certificate of Chartered Engineer was scrutinized and it was found that the same was issued on 13 -11 -2000 but a reference to 21 -11 -2000 was made therein, which was a date of opening of Letter of Credit. The Revenue also noticed that no date of manufacture was written in the invoices issued by the foreign supplier, though the date of manufacture was engraved on the machine. Further, the Solenoid Operated Valve bore the date of manufacture as 11.1988 and on Power Cable, the year 1988 was written. As such, it was believed that the machine in question was more than 10 year old and required a specific import license. Investigations were also conducted at the suppliers end by writing various letters