ELACONS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order -in -Appeal No. 38/2000, dated 14 -11 -2000 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad.

(2.) SHRI Kumaraswamy, learned Counsel appearing the appellants submitted that the issue relates to valuation. In this context he drew our attention to the finding portion of the Commissioner (Appeals) as appearing in Para 7 of the impugned order, which reads as under : - I have examined the position. The issue involved in the instant appeal is regarding the under -valuation of the Indian origin goods imported into India. The price of the Indian origin goods re -imported now cannot normally be less than the price at which they have been exported. The goods under consideration are manufactured in India by M/s. Motor Industries Co. Ltd., Bangalore. The appellants have also failed to produce any evidence in support of their claim that the invoice price reflects the transaction value. The Department has made available to the appellants the manufacturers price. Once the same is made available to the appellants, the onus shifts on to the appellants to disprove the same and produce evidence relating to contemporaneous import of identical or similar goods during the relevant period so that the same may be considered for determination of the assessable value in terms of Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Goods) Rules, 1988. The appellants have failed to do so. It is evident that no goods can be available in the international market for lesser prices than that of the manufacturers price unless the goods have been damaged or deteriorated or the international prices have so badly crashed so as to compel the suppliers to sell the stock available with them at throwaway prices. No evidence or material has been brought on record by the appellants in this regard. Hence, the reliance placed by the Department to arrive at the assessable value of the impugned goods on the basis of the export price of identical goods manufactured by M/s. Motor Industries Co. Ltd., Bangalore is perfectly valid and in order. The appellants are directed to pay the duty on the value determined by the Department. Since the goods were undervalued with the intention to evade payment of duty, the same are liable to confiscation and the appellants are liable to penal action. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the redemption fine and the penalty are reduced to Rs. 3,00,000/ - and Rs. 50,000/ - respectively.

(3.) SHRI Kumaraswamy vehemently argued that the party has challenged the price list supposed to be relied upon by the Department and no clear finding has been given. Further more the benefit in terms of Notification No. 94/96 was claimed by the party and the same has not been considered.