New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (5) TMI 936 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2017 (5) TMI 936 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Valuation - rough marble blocks imported from Turkey - Revenue took up the matter for adjudication on the ground that the value declared by the appellant was less as also on the ground that the condition of the import license stand violated - Held that: - it is well settled law that NIDB data cannot be considered as the reliable source for the purpose of enhancement. We find that the issue is no more res integra and has been settled by umpteen number o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e violation of the condition of the policy - we uphold the confiscation and imposition of penalty - he redemption fine is reduced from ₹ 5.40 lakhs to 1 lakh and the penalty from ₹ 1 lakh to ₹ 50000. - Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. - C/629/2011-CU(DB) - FINAL ORDER NO. 52909/2017-CU(DB) - Dated:- 18-4-2017 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) and Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri Kumar Vikram, Advocate for the Appellant Shri K. Poddar, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

alue declared by the appellant was at the rate of US$253.48 per MT and as such was below the floor price of US$275 per MT, as required in the import license, Revenue took up the matter for adjudication on the ground that the value declared by the appellant was less as also on the ground that the condition of the import license stand violated. The original adjudicating authority took into consideration the fact that the NIDB Data as also the weekly average of rough marble blocks of Turkish origin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

77; 5.40 lakhs. In addition penalty of ₹ 1 lakh was imposed upon the appellant in terms of the provisions of section 112 (a) of the Customs Act 1962. 3. On appeal against the above order the Commissioner (A) upheld the same. Hence the present appeal. 4. As regards valuation of the goods, it is seen that the Revenue has enhanced the value based upon the NIDB data as also on the weekly average prices, adopted from the other relevant ports. The appellant s contention is that the prices of rou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

kly average price was held as bad in law. We find that though the said decision was placed before the Commissioner (A) and he has also taken note of the same but has distinguished the said decision on the ground that in the present case the appellant has not been able to establish that there was reduction in international price during the material time. We find that such distinction made by Commissioner (A) is neither warranted nor justified in as much as the onus to prove that the import was un .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version