TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in the appeal filed by the Revenue - appeal rejected - decided against Revenue. - C/272/07-Mum - A/85928/17/CB - Dated:- 7-2-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri Chatru Singh, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for appellant Shri T. Viswanathan, Advocate, for respondent Per: M.V. Ravindran This appeal is filed by the Revenue against order-in-appeal No. 665/2006/MCH/DC/Gr.III/06 dated 8.1.2007. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of the records, it transpires that the issue involved in this case is regarding enhancement of value of the imported goods, as it appeared to the Revenue authorities that the goods were imported from a supplier who wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hy the declared value has to be enhanced by 50%, hence the same appear to be arbitrary one. As per provisions of Rule 8(2)(vi) of CVR, 1988, no value shall be determined under the provision of these Rules on the basis of arbitrary or fictitious values. Hence the enhancement of the value by the lower authority is not only arbitrary, but the same is contrary to the provisions of CVR, 1988, hence the same has to be set aside. As per the appellants, their basis of pricing is cost production/purchase plus 10% mark-up. In the appeal, they have also submitted detail chart in this regard for various items imported by them from their related supplier. In the ground of appeal, they have also cited one incident of import by them by one unrelated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal only on the following grounds of appeal:- (1) The importer in support of the contention that the invoice value of the supplier is comprising of cost plus 10% mark up on its face value, the importer did not produce any transfer pricing policy of the supplier nor did he produce any procurement invoice to ascertain the correctness of the said claim. (2) The Commissioner (Appeal) has not offered any comments on the findings of the adjudicating authority. Commissioner (Appeals) has also not discussed anything about Trade Mark Agreement, the importer is having with the supplier, as to whether the copy of agreement was submitted to Commissioner (Appeal) or not? 5. It can be seen from the above reproduced grounds of appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
