9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1427X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Bill of Entry No. 400601 dated 27/03/2008 in Kolkata Customs for import of a used and second hand 2003 model Volkswagen Beetle Cabriolet car (Petrol) 2.01. It was noticed that the car was purchased by him from a dealer in Dubai on 23rd of January, 2008. The Bill of Lading dated 6/03/08 has been issued from Japan and the goods shifted from Japan. He could not produce any invoice of the manufacturer/producer in this case. After ascertaining, the practice of determination of value of such cars from Mumbai Customs CIF value of the said car was determined on the basis of the price of the above model of car in the year 2003 as appeared in the World Car Guide 2003 after allowing trade discount and depreciation from such price in terms of S.O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for valuation by the Commissioner (Appeals)] stated by the appellants as a world authority on used car happens to reflect the Base Price (factory price) only. 3. the value was determined correctly and enhanced on the basis of World Car Guide, 2003, the reference received from the Mumbai Customs House. The fact that the car was manufactured in 2003, due depreciation was allowed in terms of S.O.03/88 dated 12.01.88 and accordingly, the value ascertained was found to be much higher than the declared value. 4. the goods being imported in violation of the Import Licensing Notes para 3 (1) (a) of the ITC (HS) EXIM Policy 2004-09. There is also a violation u/s 11 (d) & 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 as regards valuation. Hence, the quantum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent by Mumbai Customs for the valuation of the car except the oral averment in the appeal. The contention is that the car was imported in the year 2008 and the detention and demurrage charges have mounted since then by approx. 3 to 4 lakhs till today. In these circumstances, the ld. Advocate pleaded to dismiss the Revenue's appeal and direction be given to the Assistant Commissioner to release the car without any hindrance. 6. The ld. A.R. for the Revenue reiterated the grounds of appeal. It is his contention that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not taken into consideration the relevant points mentioned in the grounds of appeal. In these circumstances, the Revenue has prayed to restore the order-in-original. The ld. A.R. has also file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s basis for valuation by the Commissioner (Appeals), happens to reflect the Base Price (Factory Price) only. In these circumstances, we feel that to arrive on value of the impugned car, the case should be remitted to the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) at this stage itself for deciding the case afresh after verifying of the said facts. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and direct him to decide the case afresh after considering the evidences produced by the Revenue. Before deciding the case, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) shall also make available to the Respondents copy of the references made to the Mumbai Customs and the reply received from them. It is needless to mention that adequate opportunity of hearing shou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
