9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ashwani Kumar, Advocate (NP), for the Respondent. ORDER The respondent herein is engaged in the business of import and during the course of business, on 2-7-2002 it entered into an agreement with one Galaxy Enterprises, Hong Kong, for import of plastic body, plastic lens camera at a unit price of US $ at 0.41. Pursuant to the said agreement Galaxy Enterprises dispatched the consignment of 750 c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , however, gave the option to the respondent to get the goods released in terms of by giving bank guarantee of Rs. 10 lakhs and also for payment of differential duty amounting to Rs. 11,57,209/-. 3. The transaction value as declared by the respondent was rejected on the ground that importer failed to produce the manufacturer's invoice and also that the price was fixed on contemporaneous impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dmitted notice was issued to the respondent which was duly served. Mr. Ashwani Kumar had put in appearance on behalf of the respondent. Service is accordingly complete. 8. However, when the matter came up for hearing on 24-4-2015, nobody was present on behalf of the respondent, instead we were informed that Mr. Ashwani Kumar Dhatwalia had told the Court Master that he had returned the file t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ittedly no manufacturer's invoice was produced. No doubt, respondent had satisfactory explanation. Therefore, inasmuch as the goods were purchased by the respondent for import from a trader and not from the manufacturer. However, in such a circumstance, when the Department doubted the valuation of the goods, as declared in the Bill of Entry, or for that matter in the invoice which was produced fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
