Daya Exports Vs Commissioner of Customs (Pre.) (CESTAT Allahabad)
In this case before the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Allahabad, the appellant challenged an order confirming confiscation, re-determination of value, and imposition of penalty on imported computer cabinet cases. The appellant had imported 4,320 units, but on examination, 4,431 units were found, resulting in an excess of 111 pieces. The department alleged mis-declaration of quantity and undervaluation, relying on a Chartered Engineer’s report which described the goods as old and used computer cabinet cases or barebone systems and suggested a value of USD 12 per unit. Based on this, the declared value was rejected, re-determined, and duty demand, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were imposed and upheld in appeal.
The appellant contended that the excess quantity was insignificant and was supplied by the foreign supplier to account for possible damage during transit. It argued that such marginal excess did not amount to mis-declaration with intent to evade duty. It also challenged the valuation, stating that the re-determined value was based on a report lacking supporting evidence and that no proof existed of any additional payment beyond the invoice value. Further, it was submitted that the goods were only computer cabinet cases and not incomplete computer systems, as essential components like CPU were absent.
