9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (6) TMI 230X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n arrived on 18-2-1998 carrying cargo of 1950 MT of scrap. Prior to the entry, IGM had been filed on 16-2-1998. Three Bills of Entry were filed by M/s. Jaswantrai & Co., CHA on behalf of the importers M/s. Shree Electromelts Ltd. The goods were described as Heavy Melting Scrap under sub-heading 7204.49. The value was declared as US $ 120 cif. Benefit of Not. No. 11/97-Cus. was claimed which prescribed the rate of 5% adv. on imported heavy melting scrap provided the importer produced evidence within a stipulated time that the scrap was so melted. All the Bills of Entry were dated 16-2-1998. Vide letter dated 18-2-1998 the CHA M/s. Jaswantrai & Co. furnished supplier's certificate that the Heavy Melting Scrap consisted of railway lines, ship ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 2 lakhs M/s. Ocean Shipping Services Rs. 2 lakhs M/s. Shri Electromelts Ltd. Rs. 5 lakhs M/s. A.Jaswantrai & Co. Rs. 2 lakhs The appeals are, therefore, filed and the present applications. 4. We have considered the submissions made by Shri Parthsarathy, Advocate for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any reason the value is not acceptable, the valuation is to be sequentially done following the rules. Rule 5 speaks of transaction value of identical goods. Rule 6 speaks of transaction value of similar goods. If any evidence was available for the valuation of such goods contemporaneously imported, then the Commissioner could have recourse of these rules. The rule which he has taken recourse to speaks of the residual method. Prima facie, it would appear that not only the Commissioner made an error resulting in the violation of principles of natural justice but also that he followed an entirely different rule from what was suggested in his own show cause notice. 8. The confiscation of the vessel was under Rule 115(2). The words "smugg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
