TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as not scientifically conducted and market enquiry in the absence of any corroboratory evidence cannot become sole basis for sustaining the enhancement of value as done by the impugned order - enhancing the value of these items cannot be legally sustained. Pocket Scale & Cutters - Held that: - there is no systematic data of market enquiry available and further market enquiry alone cannot become the basis of enhancement of the value unless the results of the market enquiry are corroborated by independent evidences which could be contemporary imports or manufacturer’s price list, which again needs support by the specific written declaration from manufacturer - enhancement of value not sustainable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. C/ 54193-54194/2014-Cu[DB] - Final Order No. 52054-52055 /2017-Cu [DB] - Dated:- 28-2-2017 - Hon ble Shri S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) And Hon ble Shri Ashok K. Arya, Member (Technical) Shri Anil Kumar Khanna, Ld. Advocate for the Appellant Shri Govind Dixit Shri K.Poddar Ld. AR for the Respondent ORDER Per: Ashok K. Arya 1. The appellants, namely, Golden Agro Corporation and Shri Deepak Agarwa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubjected to market enquiry and which sealed packet was shown to whom, the collective general opinion has been taken from the petty retailers, and not from wholesalers without mentioning the identity of persons whose evidence is being relied upon, as to their identity etc. the market enquiry reports even for SS7, SS12 states that goods appear to be Chinese origin are not free from doubt and cannot be presumed to be unimpeachable, concrete, reliable piece of evidence so as to reject the transaction value. These opinions are taken with the sole motive and intention of justifying the valuation arrived at the time of seizure and drawl of Panchnama dated 28.02.2012. (iv) Further, the opinion dated 07.03.2012 of Shri Yogesh Desai who opined in respect of SS12, SS10 and SS10 is placed at P-49 of appeal book. The report cannot be presumed to be an opinion of an expert as the person examining the goods is not an expert who has any technical qualification in the field of science related to colored or imitation glass/stones and he is simply a person engaged in marketing business. (v) The language itself states that he has examined the glass chatons pouches (crystal), all are of ASFOUR co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S CHATONS: (a) 888 Brand Glass Chatons The invoice mentioned in Country of Origin Certificate was not produced by the importer Shri Deepak Agarwal in his statement dated 28.03.2012 admitted that imported glass chatons of 888 brand are manufactured by M/s ASFOUR Crystal, Egypt and the stickers of 888 brand had been removed from the cartons. M/s ASFOUR Crystal, Egypt have declared in their letter (email) dated 15.02.2014 that they have no production facilities of the said goods in China. In view of the above, the goods 888 brand glass chatons are misdeclared w.r.t. country of origin to suppress the actual transaction value with an intent to evade payment of appropriate duty of customs and hence declared value is not the correct transaction value. The price list (valid from 5th April, 2011) of the Manufacturer has been provided by the importer himself vide letter dated 26.07.2012 and on the basis of Manufacturer s Price List, the prices of the identical goods have been ascertained under sub- rule(1) of Rule 4 of the CVR, 2007. Reliance is placed upon the judgement of Hon ble Tribunal(Mumbai) in the matter of Commissioner of Customs, Pune Vs Shri Hari Corporaion[2014 (30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iving 10% discount against claim of 30% by the importer on the manufacturer s price list cannot sustain revenue s case of mis-declaration of value. In the practical world, unless manufacturer s price list has got corroboratory evidences which can be in the form of contemporary imports or further corroboration from the manufacturer s end on the prices for India for this much quantity, the Revenue s order in appeal for enhancement of value in case of 888 brand glass chatons cannot be sustained legally. 6.1.1 Further there is finding that these goods are not of Chinese origin and these goods have been mixed up with the other unbranded coloured glass chatons. This fact, however, cannot sustain the enhancement of value made in the impugned order. The revenue has not done further investigation in respect of differential value, if any, paid by the importer for these goods to sustain the charge of under valuation against the importer. The facts on record in the submissions of the revenue do not legally sustain the charge of under-valuation for these goods. The Hon ble Supreme Court decision in the case of M/s Eicher Tractors Ltd (SUPRA) supports our view on this. The Revenue has place ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
