TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 829X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon'ble High Courts that the transaction value cannot be rejected mechanically based on suspicion or general alert without supporting evidence to the effect that the invoice value does not reflect the transaction value required for assessment. Here, no evidence of any nature has been brought out or discussed before such enhancement. Even contemporaneous value of similar or identical goods have not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ime of provisional assessment assessed the goods at U.S. $ 2.8 to U.S. $ 2.89 per kg. based on a general alert issued by DRI on 09/5/11. Thereafter the assessments were finalized at the enhanced value, as above. The respondents challenged the revision of value and the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned orders set aside the enhancement and allowed the appeals. Aggrieved by this order, the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding the bonafideness of the import transaction or the invoices submitted by the respondent. The enhancement of value during the provisional assessment as well as on final assessment is, admittedly, done based only on an alert issued by the DRI in 2011. No other reason is recorded for enhancement of value. The Revenue pleads that once the importer accepts the enhancement of value, there is no qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filing such appeals. The reliance by learned DR on the decision of the Tribunal in final order No. 52569-52570/2018 dated 17/8/2015 is not appropriate. In the said decision, the Tribunal was examining the acceptance given by CHA is binding on the importer and as such upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order on enhancement of value. We find in the present case there is a speaking order passed under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the transaction value required for assessment. In the present case we find that no evidence of any nature has been brought out or discussed before such enhancement. Even contemporaneous value of similar or identical goods have not been examined and discussed. 5. In view of the above discussion, we find no merit in the appeals filed by the Revenue. The impugned order cannot be interfered with. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
