Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Century Metal Recycling Pvt. Ltd. Versus CC, Noida

2015 (11) TMI 203 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Valuation of goods - Enhance of value - No SCN issued - Violation of principle of natural justice - Held that:- Revaluation was done based upon the NIDB data and was in no way arbitrary or unreasonable. - Duty was paid at the enhanced value without protest. This shows that the appellant s contention that they did not accept the revised transaction value is obviously untenable. By consenting to enhancement of value and thereby voluntarily forgoing the requirement for a show cause notice, the appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

inspection and Revenue rightly did not proceed further collect and compile all the evidences/basis into a show cause notice, more so because had Revenue insisted upon issuing a show cause notice, in spite of the appellant having consented to the enhanced value and requested for no show cause notice it could/would have invited allegation of harassment and delay in clearance of goods. When the show cause notice is foregone and the valuation is consented, the violation of principles of natural Just .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ap of tense and taint was rejected and the assessable value was re-determined at US dollars 1875 per metric ton under Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Prices of Imported Goods), Rules, 2007. 2. The appellant has contended that : (a) The transaction value has to be accepted and the loading has been done arbitrarily, (b) No grounds have been given for rejecting the transaction value. It cited the judgement in the case of Eicher tractors Ltd Vs. CC Mumbai - 2000 (122) ELT 321 (SC), .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

recorded that the appellant had consented for the revised value in writing. It is also a fact that the duty was paid at the enhanced value without protest. This shows that the appellant s contention that they did not accept the revised transaction value is obviously untenable. By consenting to enhancement of value and thereby voluntarily forgoing the requirement for a show cause notice, the appellant made it unnecessary for Revenue to establish the valuation any further as the accepted value in .....

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 insisted upon issuing a show cause notice, in spite of the appellant having consented to the enhanced value and requested for no show cause notice it could/would have invited allegation of harassment and delay in clearance of goods. When the show cause notice is foregone and the valuation is consented, the violation of principles of natural Justice cannot be alleged. In these circumstances, alternatively also, allowing the challenge to the valuation would be of no avail as with the goods not b .....

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 s judgement in the case of Vikas Spinners Vs. CC, Lucknow [2001 (128) 143 (TRI -Del],CESTAT, dealing with a similar situation, held as under:- 7.In our view in? the present appeal, the question of loading of the value of the goods cannot at all be legally agitated by the appellants. Admittedly, the price of the imported goods declared by them was US $ 0.40 per Kg. but the same was not accepted and loaded to US $ 0.50 per Kg. This loading in the value was done in consultation with Shri Gautam S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mersault and to deny the correctness of the same. There is nothing on record to suggest that the loaded value was accepted by them only for the purpose of clearance of the goods and that they reserved their right to challenge the same subsequently. They settled their duty liability once for all and paid the duty amount on the loaded value of the goods. The ratio of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sounds N. Images, (supra) is not at all attracted to the case of the appellants. The benefit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version