Page 232 - ELT_1_1st April 2020_Vol 372_Part

118 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

thus at the gross value determined by the Department at Rs. 2,29,03,044/-, will
be as reduced by 40%, the value is worked out at Rs. 1,37,41,826/-.
Further on the above value, their duty payable will be Rs. 74,04,305/-
(approx.).
21. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant further submits that the value of
the goods is taken as per data which is showing the value of USA origin goods.
Since, the goods imported are of Chinese origin, they will be having some lesser
value. Still the Ld. Counsel for the appellant is calculating rebate @ 40% on the
value of Rs. 2,29,03,044/- as per Rule 7 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The
value calculated is as follows :-
“THE VALUE IS COMPUTED AS FOLLOWS :
The value of the goods as per the department is Rs. 2,29,03,044/- which is
taken from the internet, which is a fact admitted by the department in the
subject show cause notice and as evident from the judgments cited above
the value of the goods cannot be taken under Rule 3 and Rule 4 of the Cus-
toms Valuation Rules, 2007 and the necessary deductions as per Rule 7 of
the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 will be as follows :
i. 30% of the Customs Duty
ii. Percentage of commission : 5%
iii. Percentage of transportation : 5%
Computation Table :

Sl. Value of Goods Deductions Exact value as per Rule 7
No. (as per (as mentioned above)
department)
1 2,29,03,044/- 40% (including customs 1,37,41,826/-
duty, commission charges
and transportation charges)

Therefore, as per the above computation after deducting 40% from the in-
ternet value of the goods as taken by the department, the exact value as per
Rule 7 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 will be Rs.1,37,41,826/-, the
duty payable on this amount will be Rs. 74,04,305/- (approx.).”
22. It is further urged by the Learned Counsel that the Learned Com-
missioner has erred in imposing separate penalties both on the partnership firm
as well as on the partner under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act. Reliance was
placed on the ruling of Hon’ble High Court in the case of Praveen and Shah - 2014
(305) E.L.T. 480 and also in the case of Commissioner v. Ruby Impex - 2010 (260)
E.L.T. A51.
23. It is further urged that Section 112(a) of the Customs Act provides
for imposition of penalty for improper importation of goods - purely in relation
to any goods on the person who abets to do any act which act or omission would
render such goods liable for confiscation under Section 111 or abets the doing or
omission of such an act. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no
deliberate act of omission or commission on the part of the appellant’s, penalty
imposed is fit to be setaside
24. Further, Section 114AA provides - if a person knowingly or inten-
tionally makes, sign or uses, or causes to be made, signed or used, any declara-
tion, statement or documents which is false or incorrect in any material particu-
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st April 2020  280