REX PRINTING PRESS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KOLKATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises from OIO No. S33(VA)90/2004 -A, dated 26 -4 -2004 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata. The appellants took permission to contest and file the appeal in this Bench for the reasons stated in their application in terms of the Public Notice issued by the President. They were permitted to file the appeal in this Bench.

(2.) THE appellants imported second -hand old and used Colour Offset Printing Machine and Roller. As they did not have the import licence, therefore, the same was ordered to be confiscated and has been released on fine of Rs. 9.5 lakhs and penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/ -. The appellants are not contesting the order of confiscation in view of the Tribunal ruling rendered in the case of V. Solomon Jeyapandian v. CC, Trichy - 2002 (148) E.L.T. 810 (Tri. - Chennai) wherein the Tribunal, after examining the Supreme Court judgments on the point has upheld the order of confiscation. The only point raised by the appellants is pertaining to the valuation of the goods. They contend that the Department had obtained the Chartered Engineers Certificate in the matter and the same should be accepted in the light of the Supreme Court judgment rendered in the case of Gajra Bevel Gears v. CC, Bombay - 2000 (115) E.L.T. 612 (S.C.) where the CEs Certificate has been accepted by the Apex Court in respect of valuation of second -hand machinery. The Tribunal also, in the case of Boddulari Graphics v. CC, Chennai - 2003 (159) E.L.T. 232 (Tri. -Chennai), noted that the CE Valuers Report was not contested by the importer and, therefore, the same was relied by the Revenue and should be accepted. The learned Counsel also relied on the judgment rendered in the case of Sampurna Graphics (P) Ltd. v. CC, Chennai - 2004 (164) E.L.T. 464 (Tri. -Chennai) wherein also the CEs Certificate was accepted and based on that, the redemption fine has been fixed at 10% of the value of the said CEs certificate. She submits that penalty should also be fixed likewise to the extent of 10% of the CEs value.

(3.) THE learned JCDR opposed the prayer and submitted that the matter has to go back to the original authorities for the purpose of considering the prayer of fixation of correct valuation of the goods and for fixing of appropriate fine and penalty in the matter.