Case Law Details
Rubal International Vs Commissioner of Customs (ICD, TKD) (CESTAT Delhi)
I find that only few goods were found to be mismatch with the invoice and packing list. I further find that the appellant had given cogent explanation based on the statement and clarification of the shipper, via E-mail, clarifying that due to a large variety of goods being small in nature there occurred error at the time of packing of the goods, resulting in some mismatch and finding of few undeclared goods which is not deliberate. I find that the shipper had also offered to take back the undeclared goods as per the shipping documents. Thus, I find that there is no case of any deliberate mis-declaration on the part of the appellant (importer) who had filed the Bill of Entry declaring the goods under import as per the invoice and packing list. Accordingly, I set aside the allegation of mis-declaration.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT DELHI ORDER
M/s Rubal International, 50, Amrit Building, G.T. Road, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana (Having IEC No. 3014015326) (Hereinafter referred to as the Appellant) filed bill of entry No. 6553297 dated 30.08.2016 (container no. NKYU 4873434) for clearance of (i) glass flower vase, (ii) photo frame, (iii) wall clock, (iv) paper roll (for hair curling), (v) iron, (vi) stand clamp, (vii) eaves ball plastic, (viii) grass mat, (ix) wax and (x) baby wipes etc. The declared value was Rs. 10,89,995/-. Accordingly duty was paid as assessed of Rs. 2,77,380/- in cash and Rs. 422 through licence.
2. It is the case of the department that the goods were initially examined by the officers of Import Shed and found that some undeclared items such as (i) Caimei Extra Care Styling Gel and (ii) Enzo brand Having a Type Moving etc. which require “No Objection Certificate” from the Assistant Drug Controller (ADC). As per the department, the matter was subsequently referred to SIIB and goods were examined 100% by the officers of SIIB. It is the case of the department that the items mentioned in the said Table 02 from S. No. 1 to 6 require NOC from the Assistant Drug Controller as they fall under the category of ‘cosmetics’ and require pre-registration with the Assistant Drug Controller under Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 and other Allied Rules made thereunder, but the appellant was not having the said certificate/registration with ADC.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
