9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eign Supplier") who holds 51% of the share capital of the Importer. As the importer and the Foreign Supplier are related persons in terms of Rule 2(2) of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as "the Valuation Rules") Special Valuation Branch, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "SVB Delhi") looked into the valuation of imports made by the Importer from the Foreign Supplier. The importer submitted reply to SVB questionnaire and other documents to SVB Delhi. DC SVB issued Order-in-original No. SVB/CUS/174/HKS/2012 dated 24.01.2013, holding that the importer and the Foreign Supplier are related persons in terms of Rule 2(2) of the Valuation Rules. 2007, however, the invoice value of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... national trade as if they are not related and there is no influence of relationship on the prices. (iv) DC (SVB) ought to have recorded his finding on merits as to on what basis this declaration been accepted. The legal provisions in this regard are very clearly laid down in Rule 3(3)(b) of the customs Valuation Rules, 2007 as per which declared price can be accepted if the "Importer demonstrates" that the declared value closely approximates to one of the three values specified in I the said sub-rule. Neither any submissions of the importer are recorded in this regard in the order nor are there are any findings of DC(SVB) on this clear cut legal provision. The order of the adjudicating authority being non-speaking is thus, liable to be set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order, he prayed that the issue may be remanded to the original adjudicating authority, as has been ordered in the impugned order. 5. We have heard both the sides and perused the records. 6. The original adjudicating authority, after looking into the I agreement between the appellant and their related foreign supplier came to the conclusion that the transaction value may be accepted He has also given reasons for such conclusion. However, Revenue reviewed the same and filed the appeal before Commissioner (Appeals); who vide his impugned order, was of the view that the original authority should call for additional information/data/document from the importer and remanded the matter to the original authority for passing denovo orders. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
