9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 791X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the respondent filed a Bill of Entry No. 269318 dated 17.05.2010 for the clearance of one used Nissan Safari, Model 1999 vehicle with a declared value of 8800 USD. The importer claimed the assessment of the vehicle in terms of para 3(I) of the Import Licensing Notes to Chapter 87 of Schedule 1 (Imports) to the ITC Classifications of Export and Import item. An invoice bearing No. 26203 was submitted along with the Bill of Entry which was issued by M/s. Rama D.B.K. of Japan on 02.03.2010. Since the document filed by the importer was insufficient and therefore the importer was directed to produce proof evidencing possession of the vehicle by him. In the absence of any such evidence forthcoming, the vehicle was invoiced by Japanese dealer and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etermination of the value of the car by the original authority was upheld. Aggrieved by the said order, Revenue has filed the present appeal on the ground that the impugned order is not sustainable in law inasmuch as the Commissioner (Appeals) should not have allowed the redemption of the vehicle and should have ordered for its re-export as the same was imported in violation of the conditions of the policy. 2. I have considered the submissions of the learned AR. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee. 3. After going through the impugned order, I find that the learned Commissioner has given sufficient reasons for allowing the appeal of the assessee for redeeming the confiscated vehicle on payment of fine of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nas [2006 (196) ELT 218 (Tri.-Bang.)] does not apply because it relates to self-imports by person transferring residence to India. Since the decisions in these cases are not a precedent to be followed in this import, it shall be sufficient to hold that the invoice is the sole document furnished by appellant as proof of the price claimed to have been paid by the appellant. The inconsistencies in the invoice having been enumerated by the original authority, it clearly does not mirror the transaction value In having resorted to Rule 9 after sequentially eliminating the applicability of Rule 4 to 8, and utilizing the red book price to arrive at the assessable value, whose validity has not been controverted in the appeal, I concur with the adjud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
