CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH- COURT NO. I CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 52752 OF 2019 [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 07/2019/MKS/Pr.Commr./ICD-Import/TKD dated

30.05.2019 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi]

M/s Goldstar Glasswares Pvt. Ltd. .…Appellant C-9, Phase-II, Noida (U.P.)

versus Principal Commissioner of Customs, .…Respondent ICD, TKD, New Delhi-110020 WITH CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 52751 OF 2019 [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 07/2019/MKS/Pr.Commr./ICD-Import/TKD dated

30.05.2019 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi]

Shri Arjinder Singh Gulati, .…Appellant Director of Goldstar Glasswares Pvt. Ltd., C-187, Greater Kailash, Part-I, New Delhi-110048 versus Principal Commissioner of Customs, .…Respondent ICD, TKD, New Delhi-110020 APPEARANCE:

Dr. G.K. Sarkar and Shri Prashant Shrivastava, Advocates for the Appellant Shri Manish Kumar Shukla, Authorised Representative for the Department CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT HON’BLE MS. HEMAMBIKA R. PRIYA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

Date of Hearing: 30.01.2025 Date of Decision: 23.06.2025 FINAL ORDER NO’s. 50910-50911/2025 JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA:

Customs Appeal No. 52752 of 2019 has been filed by M/s.

Goldstar Glasswares Pvt. Ltd.¹ to assail that part of the order dated

1. the appellant

30.05.2019 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, ICD, TKD, New Delhi² that rejects the assessable value of goods declared by the appellant under rule 12 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of the Value of Imported Goods) Rules 2007³ and re-determines the same under rule 5 of the Valuation Rules read with section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962⁴. The order also confiscates the seized 9900 kgs of Melamine valued at Rs. 7,16,873/- under rule 111(m) of the Customs Act with an option of payment of redemption fine in lieu of confiscation. The order also holds that the goods of which assessable value has been re- determined are also liable to confiscation but as the goods are not available for confiscation, redemption fine is not required to be imposed. The order also confirms recovery of anti-dumping duty from the appellant under section 28(4) of the Customs Act and also imposes penalty upon the appellant under sections 114A and 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act.

2. Customs Appeal No. 52751 of 2019 has been filed by Arijinder Singh Gulati, Director of the appellant to assail that part of the order passed by the Principal Commissioner that imposes penalty upon him under sections 114AA and 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act.

3. The appellant is a private limited company with Arjinder Singh Gulati and Nirmal Paul Gulati as Directors of the Company. The appellant started the unit in 1988 and manufactured Opel Glassware but the unit was subsequently closed. Thereafter, the appellant started manufacturing melamine table wares (crockery) by using food grade melamine, which is manufactured through high pressure process.

2. the Principal Commissioner

3. the Valuation Rules

4. the Customs Act Initially, the appellant procured majority of melamine from Gujarat State Fertilizer and Chemicals Ltd but later the appellant imported food grade melamine from overseas suppliers in China.

4. Anti-dumping duty imposed on the import of melamine from China by Notification dated 16.11.2004 was extended till 01.10.2009 by Notification dated 15.01.2009 and it was further extended till 01.04.2010 by Notification dated 01.10.2009. The designated authority, by Notification dated 21.11.2008, initiated review of anti-dumping duty imposed in relation to melamine by a Notification and anti-dumping duty on import of melamine form China was thereafter extended till 01.04.2010. It was further imposed by Notification dated 19.02.2010 for a period of five years. This Notification provides that anti-dumping duty would be equal to the difference between the landed value and USD 1681.49 per MT. The reason to impose anti-dumping duty was to curtail the import