R. RAMDOSS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against Order -in -Appeal C. Cus. No. 803/2001, dated 10 -12 -2001 by which the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the vehicle which was manufactured in Japan in 1999 was sold by the dealer to the appellant in 2001. Therefore there must have been a transaction between the manufacturer of the vehicle and the dealer before the dealer sold it to the appellant. Me therefore had upheld the order of the adjudicating authority to the effect that though the vehicle has not been registered in Dubai and reportedly not used being a show room piece, it cannot be held to be a new vehicle by harmonious reading of Clauses 5 & 6 of Notification 4 dated 31 -3 -2001 and it has further been imported in violation of the import policy in force. It was in this background the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) held that the confiscation of the vehicle with an option of redemption and penalty are justified. Ld. Commissioner allowed the vehicle to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 1,70,000/ - and also upheld the penalty of Rs. 20,000/ -. He had also ordered that the transaction value has to be accepted in terms of Rule 4 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 for the purpose of assessment and the Order -in -Original No. 632/2001 was modified to the above extent.

(2.) Ld. Advocate Shri A.K. Jayaraj and Shri M.S. Kumarasamy, Consultant submitted that the ld. Commissioner has held that the car as old car for the purpose of levy of duty and has also accepted the invoice value, whereas the appellant contend that it is a new car and the rates applicable to new car should have been applied to their case. They also invited our attention to Notification No. 4 (RE -2001)/1997 -2002 in which the definition of second -hand or used vehicle has been given and the same is reproduced here -under : -

(3.) Ld. Counsels Shri A.K Jayaraj and Shri M.S. Kumarasamy also submitted that the car has been bought by a Dubai dealer directly from the manufacturer and it was kept in the show room from 1999 and has not been sold, leased or loaned prior to importation to India and it was also not registered for use in any country according to the laws of that country prior to importation in India. He further submitted that the vehicle is a right hand drive vehicle which is not permitted to be registered in Dubai. The supplier M/s. Hala General Trading had submitted a declaration dated 12 -6 -2001 to the effect that the vehicle is 1999 model, show room display unit, economical type, not registered anywhere, "0" (ZERO) mileage and sold under "as is where is" basis. They also further certified that they have sold to Mr. Ramdoss, C/o R.K. Lodge, Chennai on 17 -4 -2001 under the Invoice No. HGT/178B/2001 dated 17 -4 -2001. The above factual position has also been recorded by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (GR. 5 -B) in his Order -in -Original No. 632/2001, dated 15 -6 -2001 and these facts are not in dispute. Therefore, they contend that the car is a new car and duty should have been taken from them as applicable to new car.