V.D. INDUSTRIES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants imported a consignment of parts and components of calculators from Hong Kong. Bill of Entry was filed on 16.12.1996 declaring the value of the consignment as Rs 2,36,189.87 as shown in the invoice. A sum of Rs 1,78,451/ - was deposited on 18 -12 -1996 as duty payable on the said value shown in the Bill of Entry and the invoice. The Customs Authorities detained the goods on the ground that the goods were under -valued. According to the Department, the value of the goods was Rs. 5,93,386.43. By order -in -original No. 12/DDI/97, dated 11 -8 -1997 the entire consignment was confiscated directing the importer to pay duty on the enhanced value of Rs. 5,93,386.43. The importer was permitted to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/ - under Section 125(2) of the Customs Act. A penalty of Rs. 30,000/ - was also imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act. Though the matter was taken up in appeal before the appellate authority, the party could not get any relief in the appeal. So this Tribunal was moved by filing the appeal bearing No. C/59/98 -A. By final order No. 990/98 -A dated 15 -7 -1998, this Tribunal upheld the order of the authorities in enhancing the value of Display LCD, Rubber Connector, Key Pad and Chip on Board. On Button Cell, Metal Connector and Sticker, the Tribunal disapproved the action of the Department in enhancing their value. In this view, the matter was remitted back for re -quantification of redemption fine and penalty. Pursuant to the order of remand, the adjudicating authority by order -in -original No. 41/BKS/99, dated 26 -5 -1999 reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 45,000/ - and penalty to Rs. 20,000/ -. The importer took up the matter in appeal before the lower appellate authority. That appeal having been dismissed, he has come to the Tribunal by filing this appeal.

(2.) ALONG with the appeal, the appellants moved stay application No. C/Stay/196/2000 -A praying for staying the operation of the orders impugned in the appeal. On the value of the goods declared as shown in the invoice and the Bill of Entry, a sum of Rs. 1,78,451 / - was deposited by way of duty on 18 -12 -1996 (This payment is evidenced by TR -6 Challan No. 76078701 dated 18 -12 -1996). It is also seen that the entire goods imported are still lying with the Department. They have not been released. Under these circumstances, we do not find any justification for directing the appellants to make any pre -deposit as required by Section 129E of the Customs Act. In this view, we heard the learned counsel representing the appellants on merits.

(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel representing the appellants and the learned Departmental Representative. We perused the records.