TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 999X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 85/2013 - Dated:- 29-10-2013 - Shri P.K. Das and Shri Mathew John, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Raghavan Ramabhadran, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri P. Arul, Superintendent (AR) JUDGEMENT Per P.K. Das The appellants imported copper concentrate under seven Bills of Entry during the period April 2005 to February 2006 which are assessed provisionally under Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962. By the impugned adjudication order, the adjudicating authority finalized the assessment and directed to pay interest. The appellant paid the duty upon finalization of the Bills of Entry. They filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the levy of interest which was rejected. The demand of interest was quantified ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing both sides and on perusal of the records, we find that prior to introduction of sub-section (3) of Section 18 of Customs Act, 1962, there was no provision for payment of interest on provisional assessment of duty. It is seen that with effect from 13.7.2006 by Section 21 of the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2006 (29 of 2006), sub-section (3) was inserted under Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962, which is reproduced below:- The importer or exporter shall be liable to pay interest, on any amount payable to the Central Government, consequent to the final assessment order under sub-section 92), at the rate fixed by the Central Government under section 28AB from the first day of the month in which the duty is provisionally a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this case, we find that the valuation declared by the appellants has not been accepted by the Department but on the basis of a thorough enquiry and study of comparable goods imported by others, the higher valuation has been adopted. At the same time, we find that no incriminating evidence have been found nor any duplicate invoices or suppression of invoices etc. are involved in this case. Therefore, while confirming the differential duty demand which has been made on the basis of comparable prices, we waive confiscation of the imported goods, imposition of redemption fine and penalty in this case. As regards the order of the Adjudicating Commissioner, in page 14 that differential duty along with interest should be adjusted from the bank gua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
