Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Mahaveer Engineering

.....vide be/99/21-7-1997 under section 111(d) and offering a redemption fine of rs. 15 lakhs on the value accepted of rs. 14,84,800/- as per the reports furnished by the department's approved valuers/engineers and in having imposed a fine of rs. 1,50,000/- only on the grounds - (i) when exact make model number and year of manufacture is not established, by the importers and the valuation has not been arrived at as per boards guidelines by following the accepted depreciation method, then the value suggested and accepted by the valuer was low and should not have been relied. (ii) market enquiries reveal the larger capacity of isuzu engines to be sold at rs. 45,000/- per piece and the smaller engines at rs. 25,000/therefore margin of freight would work out rs. 250% to 200%. hence fine imposed is low.2. it is found (i) that the importers had declared a value of rs. 13,80,623/- and the departmental approved surveyors valuer/engineers had recommended a value of rs. 14,84,800/-. that value cannot be challenged on the grounds that valuation has not been arrived at by depreciation method. when year of manufacture is admitted not known, the depreciation method involving period on years cannot be applied.the ground taken does not convince us to upset the determination of value arrived at by the commissioner. (ii) the fine and penalties have been imposed, keeping in mind the tribunal decision on adequacy of fine and penalty for imports of like goods imported about and at the same time. the grounds taken do not indicate where the market enquiries for margin of profit were made and details thereof. the sale price of per piece as taken therein would indicate retail market prices and not wholesale price and retailers margins, in old and used goods, which are not comparable, are not insignificant on the goods. the grounds are inadequate to upset the fine and penalty as arrived at by the ld. commissioner.