Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (7) TMI 223 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (7) TMI 223 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Valuation of goods - Enhancement in value of goods - Held that:- in spite of clear directions of the Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-in-Appeal dated 07.08.2008 the Order-in-Original dated 28.07.2009 was issued by disregarding those directions of the Commissioner (Appeals). Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) is right in observing that the said Order-in-Original dated 28.07.2009 is not sustainable as no details have been given regarding NIDB data, w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ice and even the second time, the adjudicating authority failed the requirement of passing a speaking order complying with the directions of the Commissioner (Appeals) contained in Order-in-Appeal dated 07.08.2008. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the impugned Order-in-Appeal (which contained detailed analysis as to why the Order-in- Original dated 28.07.2009 is not sustainable) suffers from no such infirmity as to warrant our intervention - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that (i) the Commissioner (Appeals) has overlooked the fact that at the time of clearance of goods the importer did not object to the enhancement of the value and cleared the goods on enhanced value without any protest or objection, (ii) it is not correct for Commissioner (Appeals) to say that the consent of the importer even in writing is not legally sustainable, (iii) in the case of CC, Amritsar Vs. Polyglass Acrylic Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. [2008 (227) ELT 209 (Tri.-Del)] , CESTAT dismissed the app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Commissioner (Appeals) vide his earlier order dated 07.08.2008 observed as under:- "4. I have gone through the case records. The Appellants were heard by my predecessor, but he did not pass any order. They were again heard on 6.8.2008 when they re-iterated the submissions as contained in their MOA. I have seen the relevant Bills of Entry against which the present appeals have been filed. It is a fact that no reasons are forthcoming as to why the value was enhanced. It is also not known from .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t I have been frequently coming across identical cases in which the declared value had been enhanced without citing any reasons in the Bills of Entry and such cases had been invariably set aside by Commissioner (Appeals) and, subsequently, by the CESTAT. For example, one such case is Commissioner of Customs, ICD, New Delhi vs. K.D. Exports 2008(227) ELT 494 (Tri-Del). Thus, due to non application of mind at the time of enhancing the declared value, avoidable and unproductive work is being create .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to reject the value and that no legally permissible steps were followed in enhancing the assessable value. From this, one can rightly conclude that assessment work has not been completed and to pass an order under these circumstances will amount to condoning the lapses on the part of assessing officer. In any case, where the declared value has been enhanced without the consent of the Appellant, the speaking order is a must. 7. In view of the above, the concerned assessing officers are directed t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

response to that Order-in-Appeal, the Assistant Commissioner passed Order-in-Original No.340/2009, dated 28.07.2009, which is reproduced below:- "The value of the goods appeared to be low. The goods were assessed after loading the value of the same by 40%. The importer agreed to the same and recorded his consent in writing on the hard copies of the Bills of Entry. Subsequently, the importer filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) against the assessment of the goods at .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ue was loaded as provided under Rule 6 of the Valuation Rules, 1988. Order: I thus hold that the assessment is in order." In respect of appeal filed the respondent against the Order-in-Original dated 28.07.2009, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned Order-in-Appeal observed as under:- "4. At the outset, it is pertinent to point out that any proposed enhancement in the declared assessable value has to be in conformity with Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962, and rules made thereunde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e declared value whether with or without the consent of the Appellants, has to be in accordance with the provisions of the Valuation Rules. Hence, one of the reasons given by the AC that the said enhancement had the consent of the Appellants is not sustainable in view of what has been stated above. 5. The other reason given by the concerned AC for enhancing the declared value is that the same has been done under Rule 6 of the Valuation Rules and on the basis of NIDB data. Here also, it is seen t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version