Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2021 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (1) TMI 1060 - CESTAT CHENNAIValuation of imported goods - related party transaction - Jurisdiction - power of Commissioner to interfere with the order and pass an order in review - HELD THAT:- In respect of valuation of imported goods, the price at which the foreign supplier sells the goods to the importers in other countries is not at all relevant. It is not open for the reviewing authority or Commissioner (Appeals) to conduct a fishing expedition and to raise questions without giving sufficient and enough reasons for entertaining such a reasonable belief. Neither the reviewing authority nor the Commissioner (Appeals) has cited proof whatsoever to indicate either that the prices declared by the appellants were influenced by their relation or that there was a certain amount of flow back to the foreign supplier in the one form or the other. In the absence of the above, no amount of questioning, though seemingly logical, would be of any help to the Revenue. It is a settled principle of law that the authority making the allegations has to prove with sufficient evidence. In the instant case, leaving alone the evidence, even reasons to entertain such a belief have not been properly brought forth or established. It is found that neither the reviewing authority nor the Commissioner (Appeals) has made out a case for striking down the order of the original authority. Therefore, the impugned order does not stand the scrutiny of law. The declared prices cannot be reviewed without any evidence to the effect that the relation between the appellant and the foreign supplier has influenced the declared price or to the effect that there was a flow back of money from the importer to the related foreign supplier. There are nothing to sustain the impugned order. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|