9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 397X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ative (DR) For the Respondent : Shri Vijay Nair, Advocate ORDER PER. B. RAVICHANDRAN :- This appeal by Revenue is against order dated 25/04/2014 of Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, New Delhi. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent are engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicles. They are regularly importing components, spare parts, capital goods etc. from their foreign supplier ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on Rules subject to usual check and scrutiny. 2. Revenue preferred appeal against the said order which resulted in issue of the impugned order. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the finding of the Original Authority. Aggrieved by this order, the Revenue is before us. 3. The main ground of Revenue's appeal is that the lower Authorities failed to appreciate the applicability of Rule 3 (3) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Valuation issued on 15/4/2010 with addendum dated 07/7/2011. It is admitted by both the sides that the said order become final. On review the valuation was confirmed and order was passed on 19/3/2013 accepting the transaction value. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the finding of the Original Authority. He categorically observed that the Department on earlier occasions has investigated the mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent to file a further counter within 30 days, we find such direction is of no consequence as the Revenue has not followed up the same and only propriety of such direction is being questioned. On merit, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the findings of the Original Authority and on careful consideration of the grounds of appeal, we find no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
